A new – and dishonest – tool in the progressive far-left toolbox

It seems some progressives are prepared to deliberately twist copyright laws to use them against those whose political views they abhor. RJ Jones writes, “My friend gave me a tip! If you need to drown out fascists, bring a speaker & play copyrighted music at their rallies cause it will be easy to report their videos & get them taken down for copyright.” This is a reference to Youtube’s idiotic Content ID automated takedown system (soon to be mandatory for all online platforms in the EU), which indiscriminately blocks anything that it believes to contain a copyrighted work. It’s not clear whether

Continue reading

Automatic, real-time censorship… the future of the Internet?

I might consider that headline alarmist, except that it’s already happening in China, and it appears to be on the way in this country too – driven by ideologically motivated corporate executives who are also politicians. First, China.  Technology Review reports (bold, underlined text in all quoted excerpts is my emphasis): WeChat is a window into the future of the internet in many different ways. Based in China and boasting over 1.1 billion global users, it’s one of the world’s most advanced and popular apps. What’s remarkable is the way it reaches into so many corners of a Chinese person’s life: it’s the

Continue reading

The manipulated media, and how it manipulates you

Sharyl Attkisson describes how the news media and social media are manipulated by special interests, and how they in turn try to manipulate us.  In the light of the Covington affair, the Smollett fiasco, and other recent events, this is well worth watching. Ms. Attkisson has been independently investigating and reporting on scandals for years.  She knows whereof she speaks. Peter

Continue reading

After Covington, a helpful reminder from Mark Twain

The news media’s performance over the Covington affair was so shameful as to almost defy belief . . . yet they’re mostly unapologetic, and even eager to do it all over again at the earliest possible opportunity.  The truth is not in them. In that light, this quotation from Mark Twain is worth remembering.  (A tip o’ the hat to HMS Defiant, where I found the graphic.) Word. Peter

Continue reading

Big Brother is watching – and it’s not doing a damned bit of good

As part of its overall anti-terrorism strategy, the British government introduced a program called Prevent.  It appears to have become more an instrument for Big Brother-style thought control, rather than an effective tool against terrorists.  Reason reports: Part of a larger anti-terrorism strategy, Prevent was designed to prevent radicalization and seeks to monitor supposedly vulnerable people for evidence of extremism in the materials they peruse and the ideology they express. The idea is that, once identified, these individuals can be steered by authorities away from negative outcomes. “Interventions can include mentoring, counselling, theological support, encouraging civic engagement, developing support networks (family and

Continue reading

“Silencing Alex . . . for openers”

That’s the title of an article this morning by Eric Peters.  Here’s a lengthy excerpt. The other day, YouTube and Facebook and several other inter-related social media platforms banned Alex Jones – the founder of Prison Planet and InfoWars. The reason given isn’t that Alex is a “conspiracy” theorist – the ancient charge – but chiefly that he is a purveyor of “hate” speech. What this really means is that the powers that be hate the things Alex speaks about – his political incorrectness – and can no longer abide his being free to speak about such things. Having locked down

Continue reading

But what gives them the right to decide ON OUR BEHALF?

The New York Times looks at Twitter’s internal debate over whether, when, why and how to “censor” users’ speech on its social media platform. While Apple, Facebook and Google’s YouTube earlier this week purged videos and podcasts from Mr. Jones and Infowars — which have regularly spread falsehoods, including that the Sandy Hook shooting was a hoax — Twitter let the content remain on its site. In a string of tweets on Tuesday, Mr. Dorsey said Twitter would not ban Mr. Jones or Infowars, because they had not violated the company’s rules. In the aftermath, many of Twitter’s users and own employees

Continue reading

Occupations, ideology, and politics

A couple of readers sent me a link to an article titled ‘Occupations and Their Ideologies‘.  It includes this interesting graphic, showing several occupations and how their occupants align politically.  (Clickit to biggit.) The author offers this explanation: Just speculating, the left-wing occupations seem to be mostly about social performance and they garner high status. The right-wing occupations are mostly about mundane things and garner zero or negative status. And the divided occupations are those that call for ambiguous combinations of these things (person-facing but socially unimpressive). There’s more at the link. It’s certainly food for thought.  Consider the current censorship of

Continue reading

Political correctness trumps medical research – twice

It seems research is only acceptable at Brown University if it’s also politically correct. Brown University has come under fire after censoring its own study on transgender youth, which found that social media and friends can influence teenagers to change their gender identity. The university removed an article about the study from its website five days after it was published, following community complaints that the research was transphobic, the Daily Wire first reported. In addition, the findings “might invalidate the perspectives of members of the transgender community,” a university dean wrote. The dean insisted, however, that it was still committed to

Continue reading

Know your enemy #2: The silencing of opposing voices

The progressive, far-left-wing faction in US politics is aggressively pursuing so-called “deplatforming“:  denying their opponents any outlet or medium or channel from or through which to make their views known.  It’s more than censorship.  It’s a blatant attempt to ensure that an entire viewpoint or perspective never reaches those who might be persuaded by it. Fortunately, its ideological proponents make no secret of their motivation – and thereby expose their own intolerance. We are seeing the worsening of a trend that the 20th century German-American philosopher Herbert Marcuse warned of back in 1965: “In endlessly dragging debates over the media,

Continue reading