Showing posts with label social media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label social media. Show all posts

Thursday, May 10, 2018

The Death Of Free Speech: Twitter Ramps Up CENSORSHIP Of ‘Hate Facts’


Twitter is banning conservatives and others who don’t subscribe to the leftist mentality plaguing social media.  Using the excuse that people are posting “hate facts,” the social media outlet is just shutting down accounts that post any truth that doesn’t fare well for the liberal agenda.


By now, it should be well understood that the terms “hate facts” and “hate speech” are nothing more than buzzwords used by the left as an excuse to suppress the speech of those with which they disagree.  This is becoming more and more apparent as we devolve quickly toward a fully totalitarian system too.


Breitbart reported that the most high-profile individual to be banned on this basis was Islam critic Tommy Robinson, who received a permanent ban from Twitter after he posted statistics showing that Muslims are vastly overrepresented in child grooming gangs in the U.K. Robinson is now taking Twitter to court to prove that “facts are now treated as hate.”


The censorship of British accounts, including those of the Britain First team, is tied to increasing pressure from European governments for social media platforms to censor their users. Robinson claims that 10,000 Twitter accounts have been closed at the request of the U.K. government over alleged “hate.”



Facebook has banned the conservative political group Britain First for breaking its rules that prohibit “hate speech” on the social media platform.  Facebook said they had “repeatedly posted content designed to incite animosity and hatred against minority groups.”


Britain First described itself as “a patriotic resistance and ‘frontline’ for our long-suffering people” that will “restore Christianity as the bedrock” of national life and put British workers first. –SHTFPlan


There are now concerns that the accounts of American users are also being shut down at the request of European governments. Nick Monroe, an independent journalist based in America, says he was banned from the platform after he began an investigation of Tell MAMA, an “anti-Islamophobia” organization based in the United Kingdom. Monroe’s account was eventually restored without explanation only after he publicized his story, and Breitbart contacted Twitter for comments. 


Even when European politics aren’t involved, Twitter still punishes conservatives for making factual claims. Conservative twitter user Mark Samenfink had his account locked after claiming that black-on-black homicide was more common than other types of homicide and implying that Islamic terror attacks were more common than non-Islamic terror attacks.  But these facts fly in the fact of the globalist and liberal agenda of complete government control over everyone, so Twitter is doing it’s part to suppress factual information, just like Google, and Adolf Hitler in Nazi Germany.



Twitter also refuses to address attempts by left-wingers to scam its reporting system. Pro-Israel account Ozraeli Dave was hit with a temporary suspension over a tweet in which he called out an anti-semitic tweet from another user. Facebook has used this tactic as well, suspending a conservative comedian for posting violent hate messages he’s received from liberals.


Williams stated that despite multiple reports drawing Facebook’s attention to the screenshots and the abuse he keeps receiving, Facebook failed to act. “Facebook said that they reviewed the screenshots and said that none of the threats violated Facebook’s guidelines,” said Williams. –SHTFPlan


In January, Twitter employees were caught on camera boasting about discriminating against pro-Trump, conservative accounts. One employee discussed shadowbanning political accounts, a practice that Twitter has continually denied using, while another claimed that accounts that expressed an interest in “god, guns, and America” were likely to be flagged as “bots.” Another employee, Mo Norai, explained that Twitter moderators regularly discriminated against accounts deemed to be pro-Trump.


“Censorship reflects a society’s lack of confidence in itself.” –Potter Stewart


“The things that are going to be blocked are not going to be fake stories. The things that are going to be blocked and censored, the things they are going to keep from people is going to be stuff they just don’t want you to focus on or know about.” – Melissa Dykes

Saturday, April 28, 2018

EXCLUSIVE: Facebook Caught Ignoring Threats to ‘Kill Kids’ While Censoring Posts Critical of Gov’t

facebook

As police raid the homes of peaceful activists for Facebook posts critical of the state, rampant illegal threats to murder children and kill people go unchecked and essentially ignored by the social media giant.


The post EXCLUSIVE: Facebook Caught Ignoring Threats to ‘Kill Kids’ While Censoring Posts Critical of Gov’t appeared first on The Free Thought Project.

Thursday, April 26, 2018

Reality Check: Is Your Personal Data Safe Online? (VIDEO)

Reality Check: Is Your Personal Data Safe Online? (VIDEO) | facebook-exposed | Multimedia Science & Technology Special Interests Surveillance


By Ben Swann, Truth in Media | 


The Facebook scandal involving personal data mishandled by Cambridge Analytica has raised concerns over the privacy of the information we share on our social media accounts.


Some countries have gone as far as to legislate Internet data privacy with laws granting the “right to be forgotten.”


Yet Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg says we don’t need such regulations here in the states. Is he right?


This is a Reality Check you won’t get anywhere else.



It’s an unsettling thought: your personal data, being manipulated on a global scale. Where you live, what kind of car you drive, how many children you have, what food you eat, how much you money you earn, what clothes you wear, how you exercise, the list goes on and on.


While other countries are tightening laws on Internet privacy and how corporations can use your data, such as the UK’s data protection law with its “right to be forgotten,” the United States seems to be stuck in the 1980s on the issue.


In California, privacy is a right in the state constitution. “Privacy” was added to the state’s “inalienable rights” by the legislature in 1972.


And though California has been a leader in privacy, the last meaningful update to the state’s privacy laws was in the 1980s, long before today’s technology.


For context, Census data shows that in 1989, 15 percent of American households owned a computer.


Today, according to Pew Research, 77 percent of Americans have a smartphone—a computer in their pocket or purse.


And in 2015, those smartphone owners used about 27 smartphone apps per month, according to Statista.


Just think about all of the information you give to the apps on your smartphone. Do you read their terms of use?


You know you don’t. And yet, a California-based group called the Californians for Consumer Privacy has raised concern about how our information is collected and sold.


From that group came the California Consumer Privacy Act. The act is intended to not only hold major corporations making $50 million per year or more responsible for their consumers’ data, but also giving Californians the right to know where and to whom their data is being disclosed or sold, and if their data is being properly protected.


There’s nothing in California today that allows users see what data has been collected on them. And data is being collected everywhere you go.


From the checkout at Target, to your Facebook account, browsing the Internet or even just walking on a city street—credit cards are being swiped, messages are being shared, and cameras are recording.


So are the rules of how businesses use your data fair and respectful of your privacy?


One of the key aspects of the California Consumer Privacy Act is a right of action against companies that store data but have not taken reasonable steps to secure that data. That means consumers can sue companies that didn’t protect their data.


What exactly “reasonable steps” means needs to be fleshed out in the courts, but there are plenty of examples of companies that didn’t take “reasonable steps” until after data was compromised.


From December 19, 2013, “Target says hackers breached its system and stole 40 million credit card numbers.”


From September 18, 2014, “Almost immediately after word broke that Home Depot had been hacked, security experts were noting that the breach was likely even worse than the massive Target that had preceded it.”


From October 2, 2014, “JP Morgan just revealing that an August data breach could affect 76 million households.”


From February 5, 2015, “One of America’s largest health insurers, Anthem, this morning confirmed a massive data breach. Reports say hackers may have stolen up to 80 million records. No credit card or medical information is in danger, but Social Security numbers, birthdays and addresses may have been compromised.”


What you need to know is that when we provide information to a corporation, we establish a relationship.


We believe the corporation will use our information for the purpose of their service. Once your information is outside of the intended use, it’s nearly impossible to control it.


And third party sharing of your data allows it is be used, shared and disseminated without any control on your part. Big data is powerful force in the United States. But should big data be allowed to do whatever it wants with your information. If not, how do we, as the public, get some control back?


Let’s talk about that, right now, on social media, while someone collects our data.



The post Reality Check: Is Your Personal Data Safe Online? (VIDEO) appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

Wednesday, April 18, 2018

Facebook must face class action over facial recognition: U.S. judge
















If you believe in the mission of Oath Keepers, to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, please make a donation to support our work.  You can 
donate HERE.


 


 


The post Facebook must face class action over facial recognition: U.S. judge appeared first on Oath Keepers.

Tuesday, April 10, 2018

This Unsettling 4-Min Film Will Make You Re-Think Your Use of Social Media (VIDEO)

 This Unsettling 4-Min Film Will Make You Re-Think Your Use of Social Media (VIDEO) | facebook-eye | Multimedia Science & Technology Special Interests


Facebook has been under fire in 2018 so far. It seems week after week another shot is blown to the social media giant whether it be about how it preys on people’s weaknesses or whether it be mass data breaches that cause everyone to re-think the information they are giving up about themselves.


We often find it easy to blame Facebook, or blame the social media tool that has our attention, and it’s somewhat understandable that we do that. They are after all poking at our psychology. But then again, are we truly a victim to our psychology? Can we not be more present, aware and observant of what we use tools in our lives for?


Facebook, like other social media giants, are just tools for our lives. Ways for us to connect, learn, share and discover what’s going on around the world. Whether we choose to use it everyday, every hour or become obsessed with it is up to us. We can’t blame the companies, doing so turns the power away from us and onto them.


Reflection: Are you using SM as a tool? Or do you find yourself obsessed with it? You can tell by spending 24 hours away from it and see how you feel and react.


Short Film


A poetic short film made by Max Stossel & Sander van Dijk asks the question, can tech companies bring more value to our lives vs creating more distractions? As a conscious media company, we here at Collective Evolution have strived to be on the side of creating value. News, media and education should ask us to think bigger, not distract us, pull us into political bias’ and create more divides. We believe the tool of media, and social media, can be used to create a thriving world… it’s all about what we choose to support, and how we use it.


Check out the film.



The post This Unsettling 4-Min Film Will Make You Re-Think Your Use of Social Media (VIDEO) appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

Thursday, March 22, 2018

As YouTube Ignores Child Exploitation, They Announce Ban on Millions of Gun Videos

videos

Content creators are being reminded of the power in alternative platforms such as Steemit and DTube after YouTube announced that it is updating its policies and banning thousands of gun videos.


The post As YouTube Ignores Child Exploitation, They Announce Ban on Millions of Gun Videos appeared first on The Free Thought Project.

Facebook Advertisers Start Pulling Out

This report was originally published by Tyler Durden at Zero Hedge



Facebook advertisers have threatened to abandon the platform in the wake of a massive data harvesting scandal which began after it was revealed that an app created by two psychologists – one of whom Facebook employs – gathered data on over 50 million Americans and then sold it to political data firm Cambridge Analytics and several others, who used it without consent.


Mark Zuckerberg, co-founder and CEO of the social media giant gave several interviews Wednesday after spending three days in hiding, ostensibly with a crisis management team which advised him not give wholly unsatisfactory answers to one of the largest data breaches in history.


The scandal is pushing some Facebook advertisers to consider dropping the platform, reports The Times. 


ISBA, a British group of advertisers that spend hundreds of millions of pounds a year on Facebook, demanded answers. It is understood that some of its 3,000 brands, which include those of the consumer goods companies Unilever and P&G, will not tolerate association with Facebook if it emerges that users’ data has found its way into the hands of brokers and political campaigners without authorisation. Sources close to the trade body said that if the company’s answers were not satisfactory, advertisers might spend their money elsewhere. ISBA will meet Facebook executives this week.


Others, such as Mozilla – the company behind the Firefox browser – have already pulled out, or as it said have “pressed pause” on Facebook advertising. In a scathing post, Mozilla said that “when Facebook takes stronger action in how it shares customer data, specifically strengthening its default privacy settings for third party apps, we’ll consider returning.” Until then, “Mozilla will advertise elsewhere” as it warned in a blog post this morning:


Mozilla is pressing pause on our Facebook advertising. Facebook knows a great deal about their two billion users — perhaps more intimate information than any other company does. They know everything we click and like on their site, and know who our closest friends and relationships are. Because of its scale, Facebook has become one of the most convenient platforms to reach an audience for all companies and developers, whether a multibillion corporation or a not-for-profit.


We understand that Facebook took steps to limit developer access to friends’ data beginning in 2014. This was after Facebook started its relationship with Cambridge University Professor Aleksandr Kogan, whose decision to share data he collected from Facebook with Cambridge Analytica is currently in the news. This news caused us to take a closer look at Facebook’s current default privacy settings given that we support the platform with our advertising dollars. While we believe there is still more to learn, we found that its current default settings leave access open to a lot of data – particularly with respect to settings for third party apps.


We are encouraged that Mark Zuckerberg has promised to improve the privacy settings and make them more protective. When Facebook takes stronger action in how it shares customer data, specifically strengthening its default privacy settings for third party apps, we’ll consider returning.


We look forward to Facebook instituting some of the things that Zuckerberg promised today


Meanwhile, Facebook shares remain under rising pressure – falling approximately 8.6% in three trading sessions and down again on Thursday premarket as investors – particularly “ethical” investment funds – reconsider their decision to hold the increasingly radioactive company.


Nordea, the largest bank in the Nordic region, which manages about £283 billion (~$400 billion USD), said that it had put some of its Facebook investments in “quarantine” while it assessed the scandal. Union Investment, a German group that manages about £255 billion ($360 billion USD), said that it was reviewing its holding of Facebook shares. –The Times


Investors have also launched several lawsuits against Facebook, claiming that the company made “false and misleading statements” regarding its privacy policies and who they share data with.




One San Francisco shareholder, Fan Yuan, filed a lawsuit on behalf of an undisclosed party of investors who claim that Facebook’s “omissions” led to a “precipitous” decline in the company’s stock price – wiping out nearly $50 billion of value on Monday and Tuesday.


A Maryland woman who said that she was “frequently targeted with political ads while using Facebook” during the 2016 US election filed a separate suit against Facebook and Cambridge Analytica, alleging that the companies had treated her personal data with “absolute disregard”. Cambridge Analytica denies that it used Facebook data to “microtarget” political adverts when it worked for the Trump campaign. –The Times



Yesterday, WhatsApp co-founder Brian Acton, who Mark Zuckerberg turned into a billionaire after Facebook bought his company for $22 billion, is now telling people to delete their Facebook accounts, promoting hashtag #deletefacebook.




Action was referencing the online movement that is gaining steam in the wake of the data harvesting scandal.



After staying on for three years, Acton quit Facebook in September, and is now a major backer of rival messaging service Signal, which boasts encryption to make its messages resistant to government surveillance.


In a Wednesday night interview with CNN, Zuckerberg admitted that Facebook “made mistakes,” and that “This was a major breach of trust and I’m really sorry that this happened. Our responsibility now is to make sure this doesn’t happen again.”


Zuckerberg also vowed to notify all users “whose data might have been affected” by the breach, and will be “happy” to testify before congress “if it’s the right thing to do.”




Zuckerberg said in a Facebook post that he has pledged to investigate suspicious apps and ban developers who violate data sharing rules or refuse to comply with an audit. He added: “We will restrict developers’ data access even further to prevent other kinds of abuse. For example, we will remove developers’ access to your data if you haven’t used their app in three months. We will reduce the data you give an app when you sign in — to only your name, profile photo and email address.”


“We’ll require developers to not only get approval but also sign a contract in order to ask anyone for access to their private data. We’ll have more changes to share in the next few days.”


That said, tens of thousands of apps could be harvesting data…


Yesterday Dr Kogan, the Russian-linked Cambridge academic who obtained the data of 50 million users by offering “personality quizzes” before selling the data to Cambridge Analytica, told the BBC that “tens of thousands” of apps could have done the same thing.


A Facebook whistleblower told MPs that the company had ignored his warnings and lost control of users’ data by giving easy access to developers. Sandy Parakilas said that when he worked at the company in 2011-12 “personal identifiable data was basically allowed to leave Facebook”. He told MPs that he had warned executives that poor safeguards could enable foreign powers or data brokers to harvest data. –The Times


ISBA notes: “The claims that other apps using the Facebook platform, and pre-dating 2015, have collected similar bodies of personal data and that controls for distribution have been inadequate, raise questions about the possibility that Facebook data has been, or is being used improperly elsewhere. ISBA is asking Facebook for a full account.”

Facebook Can STILL TRACK YOU Even If You Delete Your Account


Facebook’s latest scandals involving Cambridge Analytica and Barack Obama’s campaign team allowed to break the user rules is prompting many to ponder whether deleting their Facebook account is the right move. But Facebook can still track you even if you delete your account.


By connecting your Facebook profile to a third-party app, you’re typically also granting that app permission to access your data. You can check which apps your Facebook account is sharing data with by clicking here.


That includes your name, profile picture, cover photo, gender, networks, username and user ID. These apps can also access your friends list and any other public data. Once the outside parties have access to your data, they can then use it to track different types of activity.


Many popular apps such as Instagram, Spotify, Airbnb, and Tinder can be connected to your Facebook account. Just weeks ago, for example, MoviePass CEO Mitch Lowe bragged that the company stores “an enormous amount of information” about users, and even tracks where they go after the movie has ended. MoviePass is also among the many apps that can be connected to your Facebook. And that’s just the beginning.


According to The Daily Mail, taking Facebook quizzes from third-party services, or doing image generators (such as the ever-popular “What Would Your Baby Look Like”, or “What Would You Look Like As The Opposite Sex”), also often gives outside firms access to your data. While these are usually preceded by a pop-up asking permission to access certain parts of your profile, many users have taken to clicking through without thoroughly reading what they’ve just agreed to. Some users are now expressing their horror upon realizing they’ve granted permission to hundreds of third-party apps. Other apps that have experienced viral popularity over the last few years, such as Facetune and Meitu, can access your Facebook data as well.


One way to try and ensure that your data stays private is to request that your Facebook account be deleted, but that doesn’t protect the information that you have already supplied. Many users are willing to trade off the risk of supplying their data for the convenience of staying connected to friends and others on the social network. Others are not.


So what can you do to protect your data if you want to stay on Facebook?   To begin, visit the settings area of Facebook found via the drop-down arrow in the top right-hand corner of your profile page on the desktop version of the site. Then click on the apps tab on the left of the page and click “show all” at the bottom, then you can see, edit, and remove all the apps you’ve ‘consented’ to track your account.


Now, a likely vast list of all apps that can access and view your own personal data will be revealed.  To edit or remove these apps from your list of permitted platforms, simply hover the mouse over one of the options. Clicking the pencil icon will bring up the edit options and clicking the ‘X’ will bring up the option to remove it. For each app that has access to the data, users can go in and customize what permissions are granted to each app.


But this is all just the tip of the iceberg so far. Facebook has untold and even horrifying amounts of information about all of its users, even those who have deleted their accounts. We will do our best to update you on the newest ways to protect your private information online as more information continues to come out.

How to Find Out if Someone’s Been ‘Stalking’ You on Facebook and Then Stop It

stalker

While there is no app that will tell you that you have a stalker, Facebook"s algorithm makes it as easy as going to your own profile pages and scrolling down until you see your friends" photos.


The post How to Find Out if Someone’s Been ‘Stalking’ You on Facebook and Then Stop It appeared first on The Free Thought Project.

Tuesday, March 20, 2018

Reality Check: Internet Purge of Dissenting Voices? (VIDEO)

Reality Check: Internet Purge of Dissenting Voices? (VIDEO) | internet-social-media-censorship | Internet Censorship Special Interests US News


By Ben Swann, Truth in Media | 


Is there an Internet purge of conservative voices or voices of dissension online? Some say yes, and that the purge is being pushed by YouTube (owned by Google) and Facebook and Twitter.


We’ve heard about censorship before, but is what is happening now an all-out purge?


Let’s give it a Reality Check you won’t get anywhere else.



You might be a fan, you might be disgusted by him. But there is no doubt that InfoWars founder and radio host Alex Jones is a lightning rod. His YouTube channel has over 2.2 million subscribers and more than 33,000 videos.


Just days ago, Jones claimed that YouTube had begun a process of taking his channel down.


On March 3, CBS reported, “Jones tweeted that he had ‘set up a new channel’ that the ‘SPLC,’ or the Southern Poverty Law Center, wanted censored. In one of the videos on the channel called ‘InfoWars Censored,’ Jones said, ‘We’re live on Facebook, on Twitter, on Periscope, but we cannot go live on the Alex Jones channel — it’s been frozen for the third time in one week.’”


YouTube confirmed to CBS News that some advertisers had asked that their ads be pulled from Jones’ channel but there was “no plan”…“at present” to remove the channel completely.


Of course, all of this comes after YouTube announced in December that it would hire 10,000 new moderators to flag content. And those moderators have been flagging at stunning rate.


But more than flagged, YouTube is outright banning channels. Some YouTube channels recently complained about their accounts being pulled entirely with no advance warning. In this latest case, YouTube seems to have been flagging content that was either deemed as pro-gun or conservative content.


According to The Verge, “YouTube indicated that as the platform ramps up human-powered moderation efforts, new moderators may have mistakenly removed or flagged right-wing videos and channels. Bloomberg reported the news this afternoon, quoting a YouTube spokesperson saying that ‘as we work to hire rapidly and ramp up our policy enforcement teams throughout 2018, newer members may misapply some of our policies resulting in mistaken removals.’ The spokesperson said that YouTube’s policies had not changed, and that ‘we’ll reinstate any videos that were removed in error.’”


So it’s not a conspiracy.


There is no question that human moderators were, in fact, pulling down “right wing” or “conservative content.”


But why? What is really happening here? Because YouTube’s push to control video content, just like Facebook is nothing new. In fact, it has been happening for some time.


Mike Cernovich tweeted that a video he has posted of Antifa protesters chanting death threats at a protest in DC was taken down by YouTube because it violated community guidelines.


To be clear, the video was about 30 seconds of an actual protest in DC. And the language of the protesters violated community guidelines? That is called news, YouTube. But it was not allowed.


Mike Adams, the founding editor of NaturalNews.com, announced March 3:


“YouTube has now deleted the entire Health Ranger video channel, wiping out over 1,700 videos covering everything from nutrition, natural medicine, history, science and current events.”


So why is all of this happening? Is it all because YouTube is trying to control the Internet? Maybe not.


There is, in fact, a very coordinated effort by a number of organizations, like Media Matters for America and the Southern Poverty Law Center to silence voices with which it does not agree.


I know this first hand, as these organizations have attacked me personally trying to silence my voice.


Full disclosure here, I am ideologically a libertarian, neither on the left or the right. But according to these groups, I am “alt-right”—a dog whistle which means white nationalist. I am not, not at all. But that doesn’t stop them from slandering me.


The goal of these organizations is to silence dissent. Not just from the right, but from the left as well.


Anyone who is not part of the establishment structure is attacked.


Facebook is going through a very similar process right now, with increased pressure to control voices on its platform.


Remember in 2016 it was widely reported by several outlets, including Gizmodo:


“Facebook workers routinely suppressed news stories of interest to conservative readers from the social network’s influential ‘trending’ news section, according to a former journalist who worked on the project. This individual says that workers prevented stories about the right-wing CPAC gathering, Mitt Romney, Rand Paul, and other conservative topics from appearing in the highly-influential section, even though they were organically trending among the site’s users.”


Twitter does the same thing. In December, Twitter announced strict enforcement of new rules on “hateful conduct and abusive behavior.”


According to Politico, “That provoked the first objections from some on the right who called the steps a ‘#twitterpurge.’ The company conceded at the time that ‘we may make some mistakes and are working on a robust appeals process.”


So what you need to know is that the YouTube and Facebook purges are not a new problem.


Mainstream media networks and newspapers have routinely pushed narratives in their newsrooms for decades. We all know that.


Yet, for some reason, Facebook and YouTube, which have far more influence than those networks, have chosen to bend to pressure and try to control the narratives on their platforms.


YouTube says its mission is, “to give everyone a voice and show them the world.” But the truth is, they are not.


The problem for any dissenting voice is that if you are using your voice on someone else’s property, i.e., YouTube or Facebook, you will never have control of it. Which is why the next frontier must be decentralized platforms.


Platforms like Dtube and Steemit, built on blockchain, will be future of how content, the good the bad and ugly, will be stored. And the efforts to silence dissenting voices, will actually be the undoing of YouTube and Facebook.


As for those of us who have a voice, you and me, well… if you do not object to YouTube and Facebook purging voices with which you do not agree, then just wait.


Because if you are silent now, it may soon be the voices you do agree with that will also be silenced. And who then will be left to come to that defense?


That’s Reality Check. Let’s talk about it right now on Facebook and Twitter.


The post Reality Check: Internet Purge of Dissenting Voices? (VIDEO) appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

List of Banned and Censored YouTube Channels – Various Themes Emerge

List of Banned and Censored YouTube Channels – Various Themes Emerge | censored-YouTube-channels | Free Speech Internet Censorship Special Interests US News

This list of banned and censored YouTube channels shows exactly what the Establishment doesn’t want you to be investigating, exploring, discussing and thinking about.


The list of banned and censored YouTube channels is rapidly increasing, as Google-owned YouTube has been carrying out a censorship blitz to strike many long-standing, hugely popular channels from its platform. Alphabet-Google-YouTube is a giant corporation, and corporations are run for one purpose (profit), so from one perspective, this censorship spree seems self-defeating, since they are deleting many popular channels. Some of these had huge followings of between 100,000 and 500,000 (or more), which may cost YouTube money in the short term. However, to understand this censorship purge you need to understand that the Hidden Hand or the dark force which controls the New World Order also controls Alphabet-Google-Youtube, and is clearly using its reach and power to suppress alternative thought.


YouTube, Google, Facebook, Twitter: Publicly-Funded “Private” Corporations


At first glance, it may seem fair that social media giants like YouTube get to censor people, because they are private companies not public/government companies, right? It’s their platform, right? Not exactly. These social media companies are more like private-public partnerships. They would never have gotten off the ground were it not for the government’s seed money, especially through MIC agencies like DARPA and the CIA. Additionally, these companies are given massive tax breaks every year. Alphabet-Google in particular has a very close relationship with the US Government. In fact, Google just got caught collaborating with the Department of Defense to use AI in analyzing drone footage, according to this Activist Post article by Jake Anderson.


Is it fair for these companies to take so much public help and support, then turn around and disregard the right to free speech as enshrined in the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution and elsewhere?


Censorship on the Fakest of Pretexts


Make no mistake about their actions; this is censorship, pure and simple. The censored YouTube channels were all given fake pretexts and false reasons, but the pattern of censorship is undeniable. Alphabet-Google-YouTube found ways to delete entire channels on the basis that they were breaking YouTube’s nebulous “community guidelines”, or that they were in breach of copyright (relying on allegations of accusers). For some or many of these, YouTube even went back 3+ years to find some piece of supposedly incriminating evidence in a video that had previously been perfectly fine. Any excuse will do.


In a similar vein, the Facebook account of David Icke (with 700,000+ followers) mysteriously disappeared and was taken down for over a week before being magically reinstated. Facebook later said it was a “mistake.” Sure it was. Everyone in the Alternative Media / Independent Media is now fully aware that if they haven’t already been censored, they are about to be. It’s only a matter of time as the Establishment, via its Establishment platforms, purges any anti-Establishment view.



List of Banned and Censored YouTube Channels – Various Themes Emerge | censored-youtube-channels-library-censor-jfk-quote | Free Speech Internet Censorship Special Interests US News

Censored YouTube channels: JFK spoke out against censors.



Using the Censorship Purge Against the Censors


Every crisis has an opportunity, and although this censorship purge will affect the Independent Media in the short term, there are good things to come from it. Firstly, it will force alternative content creators to migrate away from the giant corporate platforms to other places where their views, writing, speech, art and content will never be censored. Many great platforms already exist which are trying to find ways to reward content creators, such as Minds and Steemit. Secondly, as we shall see below, the NWO censors are overplaying their hand by purging so much; the list of censored YouTube channels reveals a pattern of content. So now we can see what they don’t want us to know …


List of Censored YouTube Channels


Thanks to Reddit, we have this list of censored YouTube channels that was posted on March 1st, 2018. However, it is an incomplete list and does not include some big YouTube channels that were censored recently, such as those of Waking Times and Activist Post (where I also write as a contributor). Since march 1st, other YouTube channels have been deleted (such as Natural News / Mike Adams). Some of the channels have been reinstated, but the writing is on the wall; it’s only a matter of time before they get permanently scrapped. Here is the list:



  1. According to Joe

  2. Adamic Amethyst

  3. AmericanEveryman

  4. animal farm

  5. Anti-School

  6. aplaintruth

  7. Arthur Koestler

  8. ashtonbirdie

  9. Back to the Constitution

  10. Barry Soetoro

  11. Blackstone

  12. Bombard’s Body Language *

  13. Brave New World

  14. Charles Walton

  15. Charlton

  16. Colin Flaherty

  17. Crow777 *

  18. Darkness at Noon

  19. David Seaman

  20. Defango *

  21. Destroying the Illusion

  22. Dr. Jerome Corsi

  23. Dr. of Common Sense

  24. Dustin Nemos

  25. Edgy Sphinx

  26. Elliott Marxx

  27. Eric Dubay

  28. Factions of Freedom

  29. FAKE NEWS REPORT

  30. Free Radio Revolution Revived

  31. FromDeath2Life

  32. Gematrianator

  33. HowISeeTheWorld

  34. InTruthbyGrace

  35. Jake Morphonios

  36. Jay Myers

  37. Jim Marrs

  38. Joanne Steen

  39. Johnny Supertramp

  40. JYW420

  41. Kalika from “For the People”

  42. Kearn Kearsy

  43. Kevin K Johnston

  44. Kinningan

  45. Lawarewolf

  46. Liberty Columnist

  47. Mag Bitter Truth

  48. Matrix Breakout

  49. Max Malone

  50. McFly

  51. McSimonius

  52. mgtow is freedom

  53. Mlordandgod

  54. Murdoch Murdoch

  55. Operation Hal

  56. Peekay

  57. Peekay Boston

  58. Psyched Substance

  59. Redd Dog Truth

  60. Richie Allen Show

  61. RichieFromBoston*

  62. Ron Johnson

  63. Russian Vids

  64. Sargon of Akkad *

  65. The Black Child

  66. The Kepler Telescope Channel

  67. The Ochelli Effect

  68. The Paulstaul Service

  69. Titus Frost

  70. TruthmediaRevolution

  71. Urban Moving

  72. Victurus Libertas VL

  73. WAP tech

  74. Willy Myco


As soon as I saw this list, I immediately recognized many of these channels as superb content providers. The owners of these channels are undoubtedly free thinkers willing to push the boundary of what is known and question everything.


Some very interesting themes emerge. Apparently, these are the topics that the NWO manipulators would rather you didn’t think about (topics in bold, censored YouTube channels in parentheses):


– False Flag shootings, including False Flag Hoaxes (Free Radio Revolution Revived, Peekay, Peekay Boston, The Paulstaul Service)


– Flat Earth (Eric Dubai, aplaintruth)


– Nanotechnology/Bioweapons, Directed Energy Weapons (aplaintruth)


– Gematria (Gematrianator) (Gematria is the art of assigning or decoding a system of numerical values to words in the belief that words with identical numerical values bear some relation to each other)


– Space fakery / Moon as a Hologram (Crow777 [whom I interviewed here], Russian vids)


– Various Aspects of the Global Conspiracy, e.g. Zionism, Geopolitics, Extraterrestrials and the Hidden History of Humanity (Jim Marrs, Richie Allen show, MLordandGod, Destroying the Illusion)


– Fake News (FAKE NEWS REPORT)


– Satanism, Hollywood, Pedophilia (Jay Myers, who process quality conspiracy analysis)


[Many of these topics are covered on The Freedom Articles: here are some links for those that want to research them further:


http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/category/false-flag-staged-terror-events/


http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/category/zionism/


http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/category/geopolitics/


http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/category/ets-ufos-and-the-alien-agenda/


http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/category/satanism/


http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/category/pedophilia/]


Yes, Alphabet-Google-YouTube has a distinct leftwing bias, due to its own ideology (as exposed in the incident where Google fired James Damore), and has been employing the SPLC (Southern Poverty Law Center, Rothschild connected) to purge rightwing channels. However, this censorship blitz is far beyond left vs. right. It’s all about limiting the possible range of human thought to keep the Control System in place.



List of Banned and Censored YouTube Channels – Various Themes Emerge | censored-YouTube-channels-legal-implications | Free Speech Internet Censorship Special Interests US News

Censored YouTube channels: a tweet by Paul Watson. What are the legal implications?



Final Thoughts


Let’s use this purge of censored YouTube channels to find better platforms that decentralize power, reward content creators and pledge to support free speech no matter what. One solution is the launch of Real.Video as announced by Mike Adams. There are many others out there.


There is no reason we have to let the unlimited diversity of the internet – and the unlimited diversity of humanity – be stymied and controlled, or funneled into giant megalithic platforms that only seek to serve the Establishment.


Sources:


*https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/816mzt/big_alphabetical_list_of_banned_youtube_channels/


*https://www.activistpost.com/2018/03/government-conscripts-google-military-industrial-complex.html


*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/dissolving-old-description-of-reality/


The post List of Banned and Censored YouTube Channels – Various Themes Emerge appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

Independent Journalist Exposes How Social Media Companies Are Systematically Silencing Conservative Voices

Independent Journalist Exposes How Social Media Companies Are Systematically Silencing Conservative Voices | Ben-Swann-YouTube-Screenshot | Internet Censorship Special Interests US News


Ben Swann has done it again.  A new video that he just released about the stunning purge of conservative voices that we are now witnessing has already been viewed more than 24,000 times on YouTube alone.  I have been writing about all of this censorship quite a bit recently as well, but up until now I have not revealed the true extent to which it has hit me personally.  Like President Trump and other prominent conservatives, engagement on my personal Facebook profile has fallen dramatically.  We are working like mad to keep engagement up on our official Facebook campaign page, but it has been a real battle, and today Facebook just banned me again from posting to groups for a few days.  The funny thing is that I had barely shared anything recently.  On Twitter, I have been told by a social media expert that my account has been “shadowbanned”, and that probably explains why engagement on Twitter is only a small fraction of what it once was.  Of course dozens of other prominent conservatives are suffering the same kind of censorship, and it is absolutely imperative that we stand up against this unprecedented assault on our ability to communicate with one another.


It has become quite obvious that the big social media giants want to systematically exclude any voices that they do not like from the marketplace of ideas.  In his new video, Ben Swann points a finger at the biggest offenders…


“Is there an Internet purge of conservative voices or voices of dissension online?” Swann begins in a recent “Reality Check” report on the issue. “Some say yes, and the purge is being pushed by YouTube, owned by Google, by Facebook, and by Twitter.”


They don’t call them “the thought police”, but that is precisely what the small armies of “moderators” that the social media giants are hiring are turning out to be.  For example, late last year YouTube announced that it would bring on “10,000 new moderators” to “flag content”…


“Of course, all of this comes after YouTube announced in December that it would hire some 10,000 new moderators to flag content,” Swann reported. “And those moderators have been flagging at a stunning rate.”


He noted further that in several cases the moderators were pulling entire channels “without any advance warning” whatsoever, and that most of those channels were deemed “either pro-gun or conservative.”


If you have not seen Swann’s new video yet, you can watch it here.  Following the video, other content creators commented on how they have been affected by the recent social media censorship…


-“Hey Ben, just thought I would share my story. I have now been removed from YouTube 6 times in the past few years. I am non-violent, don’t cuss, don’t show blood or gore, and I use mainstream media news clips that usually talk about these large shootings that are being used as a reason to change gun laws. I built my old channels to 10 thousand subscribers and 2.5 Million views twice, only to have my accounts removed.”


-“THEY DELETED MY 300K VIEWS VIDEO SHOWING HOW CNN LIED ABOUT THE CHEMICAL ATTACK IN SYRIA. IT’S HAPPENING, I GOT A STRIKE FOR IT.”


-“They even hit vdeos I had set to private that weren’t even viewable by the public. To keep my channel I deleted over 300 videos spanning back 2 years and that is lot counting the half dozen plus that YouTube yanked.”


-“I received 2 strikes in 48 hours on videos exposing crimes of the US government (that had been up for 2-3 years), which is what all my videos do. I deleted the videos from my channel to save this account for contact reasons but, It still might get deleted anyways.”


-“I deactivated my Facebook. They were instantly removing my comments. My comments had nothing to do with anything, but I did try to post a conservative video in a comment box and after that ALL of my every day comments were instantly removed and marked as spam. I am also Libertarian. I can’t believe Health Ranger’s channel was removed. I think it is awful what they are doing. Taking away support is fine, but don’t take down the channel!”


I believe that it is fundamentally un-American for social media giants to try to use their power to silence conservative voices.


These big tech companies built empires by allowing everyone to have a voice, but now they are systematically attempting to exclude conservatives from the conversation, and we should all find that extremely offensive.


If you want someone in Washington that will fight as hard as he possibly can against this kind of censorship, I hope that you will help us win our race for Congress on May 15th…


Donate By Credit Card Online: https://secure.anedot.com/michaelsnyderforcongress/donate


Donate By Paypal: https://donorbox.org/michael-snyder-for-congress


Donate By Check: Make your check out to “Michael Snyder For Congress” and send it to the following address…


Michael Snyder For Congress

PO Box 1136

Bonners Ferry, ID 83805


We are in the middle of the final money bomb of the 2018 primary campaign, and you will be able to track the progress of the money bomb on Swampbomb.com.


If you live in north Idaho, I hope that you will come out for the kickoff event for the last 60 days of our campaign in Sandpoint on the evening of March 15th.  And you can see the remainder of my speaking schedule for the month of March right here.


We are in a battle for the soul of our nation, and the left is fighting dirty.


All throughout history the left has always sought to silence dissenting voices when they have taken power, and now they are trying it in this country.


Of course we are not about to let that happen, and the left is in for a very rude awakening during the 2018 mid-term elections.


The post Independent Journalist Exposes How Social Media Companies Are Systematically Silencing Conservative Voices appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

Are The Social Media Giants Trying To Steal The 2018 Elections By Censoring Conservative Websites?

Are The Social Media Giants Trying To Steal The 2018 Elections By Censoring Conservative Websites? | Steal-Public-Domain | Free Speech Internet Censorship Politics Special Interests


Nobody is disputing the fact that YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other social media giants are censoring conservative material.  In fact, this is probably the largest purge of conservative voices in the history of the Internet.  Obviously this is going to cause large numbers of people to stop using their platforms, so why would they do this?  Well, to some conservatives the answer is obvious.  These social media giants watched Donald Trump use their platforms extremely effectively in 2016, and many believe that they are absolutely determined to never let that happen again.  In fact, Mike Adams of Natural News is completely convinced that there is a concerted effort by these social media giants to steal the 2018 elections…


The realization is suddenly obvious: The Google / YouTube selective “censorship rampage” that has targeted conservative websites and content creators is a brazen, illegal scheme to interfere with U.S. elections and steal the 2018 mid-terms.


The systematic silencing of conservative views is necessary, of course, for Democrats to win enough seats to gain control of the U.S. House of Representatives after the mid-term elections. Once control is established, Democrats will immediately move to impeach President Trump. Although the Senate would not likely prosecute that impeachment, the mere achievement of the U.S. House declaring “impeachment” would be enough to convince most brainwashed news consumers that Trump is somehow a guilty criminal (nobody will remember that Bill Clinton was also impeached by the House). From there, the 2020 presidential election is also stolen, and Democrats land their selected tyrant in the White House just in time for Ginsberg’s retirement from SCOTUS.


If voices on the left were being censored to the same degree as conservative voices, it would be really hard to make such an argument.


But the truth is that the numbers show that conservative voices are being hit extremely hard by the censorship while liberal publishers have been mostly “unaffected”…


Facebook’s January 12 announcement that it would begin to de-prioritize news publishers and their posts in users’ News Feeds has had a surprisingly profound and partisan impact. According to The Outline’s analysis of Facebook engagement data obtained from research tool BuzzSumo, conservative and right-wing publishers (such as Breitbart, Fox News, and Gateway Pundit) were hit the hardest in the weeks following the announcement, with Facebook engagement totals for February dropping as much as 55 percent for some, while the engagement numbers of most predominantly liberal publishers remained unaffected.


And this even applies to politicians as well.  For example, President Trump’s engagement on Facebook has fallen 45 percent since the algorithm change…


The algorithm change caused President Donald Trump’s engagement on Facebook posts to plummet a whopping 45%.


In contrast, Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT) do not appear to have suffered a comparable decline in Facebook engagement.


Top conservative Facebook pages with daily traffic in the millions have seen 75% to 95% drop in traffic.

Young Cons, Western Journalism, SarahPalin.com,Independent Journal Review, Right Wing News, and several others have seen dramatic loss in traffic.


Needless to say, my website (http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/) has been affected as well.


So what can we do?


We can fight back.  One of the primary ways that we can do that is by electing pro-Trump candidates all over the nation in 2018.  Right now I am engaged in an extremely close race with three guys that did not want Donald Trump to win the Republican nomination in 2016, and I need your help to win on May 15th.


It is fundamentally wrong for the social media giants to pick winners and losers in the marketplace of ideas.  I will fight online censorship as hard as I can in Washington, and if you believe in what we are trying to do I hope that you will stand with us.


Donate By Credit Card Online: https://secure.anedot.com/michaelsnyderforcongress/donate


Donate By Paypal: https://donorbox.org/michael-snyder-for-congress


Donate By Check: Make your check out to “Michael Snyder For Congress” and send it to the following address…


Michael Snyder For Congress

PO Box 1136

Bonners Ferry, ID 83805


Whenever radical leftists have taken power anywhere in the world, they have always tried to shut down free speech.


They want to follow the same formula in the United States, but we are not going to allow them to do that.


There are millions upon millions of red-blooded Americans that still greatly love this nation, and this silent majority is rising up to take our country back.


The post Are The Social Media Giants Trying To Steal The 2018 Elections By Censoring Conservative Websites? appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

Modern Newspeak: How Internet Censors Are Making Sure You Hear Only One Side of the Story

Modern Newspeak: How Internet Censors Are Making Sure You Hear Only One Side of the Story | internet-censors | Free Speech Internet Censorship Politics Special Interests


It’s not breaking news that the internet censors have been hard at work to silence voices that are in opposition to the mainstream media agenda. But after the influence that social media had on the last election, things are going to a whole new level. The internet, that last bastion of truly free speech, isn’t very free anymore.


We’re watching the evolution of Newspeak right before our very eyes as the internet strives to silence any voices that oppose their carefully crafted stories of how guns are bad, there are 291 genders, and anyone who isn’t a liberal is an evil Nazi racist.


If you aren’t familiar with the term “Newspeak,” it’s from George Orwell’s prophetic novel, 1984.


“Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thought-crime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it. Every concept that can ever be needed will be expressed by eactly one word, with its meaning rigidly defined and all its subsidiary meanings rubbed out and forgotten. . . . The process will still be continuing long after you and I are dead. Every year fewer and fewer words, and the range of consciousness always a little smaller. Even now, of course, there’s no reason or excuse for commiting thought-crime. It’s merely a question of self-discipline, reality-control. But in the end there won’t be any need even for that. . . . Has it ever occcured to you, Winston, that by the year 2050, at the very latest, not a single human being will be alive who could understand such a conversation as we are having now?” (source)


YouTube, Twitter, and Facebook have all been participating in a full-on purge of not just conservative voices, but the voices of anyone who is loudly anti-establishment. Any internet personality who is pro-gun or anti-socialism can fully expect to be censored. If you go against the agenda, you will be silenced.


Apparently, we have become too discerning for their liking and we can’t be trusted to hear both sides of the story and decide what seems most accurate.


Let me preface this: It isn’t about being a fan of websites like Infowars or Natural News. It’s about being a fan of free speech. It’s about getting the truth instead of a carefully scripted narrative.


In this video, Ben Swann, who is mercifully back from a long, unexplained hiatus, gives us the facts on how the internet censors are striving to ensure we hear only one side of the story.



I’m certainly not in the same category as Mike Adams or Alex Jones, who have hundreds of thousands of followers, but even I have experienced this censorship. Facebook frequently refuses to allow me to pay to boost posts that might be controversial in nature, Back in 2016, I posted an article containing 2 videos, one of which was quickly removed from YouTube. It was about the threat of civil unrest to the Milwaukee suburbs after a cop killed a black man. The media portrayed the man’s sister as warmly trying to prevent the unrest, urging people not to burn down their own neighborhoods. But they cut her rant right before she urged people to burn down the suburbs instead. I quoted her as saying:


Burnin down sh*t ain’t going to help nothin! Y’all burnin’ down sh*t we need in our community. Take that sh*t to the suburbs. Burn that sh*t down! We need our sh*t! We need our weaves. I don’t wear it. But we need it. We need our food. We need our gas. Y’all wanna hurt somebody you take that sh*t further out! (source)


But somehow, I was the one who was in the doghouse for quoting what she said and showing both of the videos. My article was reported as “hate speech” a number of times and Facebook removed it. Not only did they remove it, they banned me from posting for a week, giving me a “warning” about hate speech. I also got put in Facebook jail once when someone asked what Godwin’s Law was and I used the word Nazi because it hurt someone’s feelings who was from Germany when I said the word “Hitler.” I could not make this stuff up.


A lot of you may be wondering why alternative media sources use social media at all, and the answer is – we have to if we want to be heard. If we want to be competitive and we want our stories to be out there, we must go where the people are. And there are millions of people on Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube.


But purges like this are why it’s particularly important that you sign up for email lists if you want to hear the real stories. (You can sign up for mine right here.) And even then, it isn’t a guarantee you won’t be the victim of censors. During the election, for research purposes, I signed up for both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump’s email lists. Clinton’s ended up in my inbox without fail, while Trump’s went to my spam folder, no matter how often I marked it as “not spam.”


This is something we have to stop now. We have to speak up and let these social media outlets know that we aren’t going to put up with their censorship and their control of the national narrative.


We’re watching 1984 unfold right before our very eyes.


The post Modern Newspeak: How Internet Censors Are Making Sure You Hear Only One Side of the Story appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.