When George Floyd, an unarmed black man, was killed by Minneapolis police in May 2020, donations poured in for Black Lives Matter (BLM) from people who thought they were funding racial justice initiatives and helping to ensure bad-actor cops would finally be held accountable for their violent actions.

Surely some of the donationsdidgo toward that. But $6 million of them went toward paying for a 6,500-square-foot house in Southern California, replete with a pool and a bungalow.

Worse still, when theNew York Postreported on Black Lives Matter's organizational malfeasance, Facebook censored the story. Meta, which owns Facebook, has deemed the content "abusive."

In October 2020, Black Lives Matter received $66.5 million from generous donors. Later that same month, a man named Dyane Pascallthe financial manager for BLM co-founder Patrisse Cullors' consulting firmbought the $6 million house. "Pascall transferred ownership of the house to an LLC established in Delaware by the law firm Perkins Coie," Sean Campbell reports at Intelligencer, which "ensured that the ultimate identity of the property's new owner was not disclosed to the public."

Since then, the house's raison d'etre has beensomewhat unclear. It serves as a sort of secure locationproviding high-ranking members of the organization a place to sleep when they need itbut also a place to record content for posting on social media, both for the BLM account and for Cullors' own projects (like a peach cobbler cooking video, notes Intelligencer).

More from Campbell:

On March 30, I asked the organization questions about the house, which is known internally as "Campus." Afterward, leaders circulated an internal strategy memo with possible responses, ranging from "Can we kill the story?" to "Our angle needs to be to deflate ownership of the property." The memo includes bullet points explaining that "Campus is part of cultural arm of the org potentially as an 'influencer house,' where abolition+ based content is produced by artists & creatives." Another bullet is headed "Accounting/990 modifications" and reads in part: "need to first make sure it's legally okay to use as we plan to use it." The memo also describes the property as a "safehouse" for leaders whose safety has been threatened. The two notions that the house is simultaneously a confidential refuge and a place for broadcasting to the widest possible audience are somewhat in tension. The memo notes: "Holes in security story: Use in public YT videos."

None of this is technically illegal, but all of it is ill-advised if your goal is to ensure donors trust that their money will be used to advance racial justice, not personal enrichment for the founders. And these reports, from both Intelligencerand the New York Post, are extraordinarily damning for an organization whose leaders have already come under scrutiny for their extravagant spending. Cullors' posh real estate holdings totaling at least $3.2 million were the subject of a prior New York Postpiece that ended up being censored by Facebook, unable to be shared on the platform.

This isn't the first time thePosthas run afoul of the Facebook overlords. In February 2020, the publication ran one of the earliest pieces introducing the theory to U.S. audiences that the coronavirus may have been the result of a lab leaka theory that became popular in May 2021, with The New York Times,The New Yorker, andThe Atlanticrunning articles that began to take the theory seriously, and one that still, months later, hasn't been discredited.

Facebook's fact-checkers somehow deemed thePost's reporting untrue, but reversed the ban on sharing man-made lab leak information inMay 2021.

And, in October 2020, after thePostpublished a report on Hunter Biden's laptop, Twitter suspended the publication's account while Facebook took steps to limit the reach of the article. Just last month, The New York Timesconfirmed that the initial reporting checked out with its own story on the Biden laptop. (Former head Jack Dorsey commented in November 2020 that Twitter had erred in its decision and reiterated his expansive commitment to free speech principles in congressional hearings months later, though Twitter has still been the subject of ongoing content moderation controversy.)

It's not just that such censorship is bad in principle (it is!), but also that the censors are often wrong and clumsy when they attempt to deem what's true and false. Private companies like Twitter and Facebook/Meta have every right to decide their own content moderation policies, but it's not hard to notice patterns in who and what they choose to crack down on. It's not always that the information is incorrect, just that the reporting is embarrassing to favored political causes or complicates a prevailing narrative.

It's unclear why an opulent 6,500-square-foot $6 million mansion is needed to end police brutality and bring about racial justice for black Americans. It's even more unclear why Facebook would want to hide this information from interested users, unless it sees its role as merely running interference for political allies, hiding credible journalism when it's damning to them.

Original post:

Why Is Facebook Censoring Articles About How BLM Used Donations To Buy a $6 Million House? - Reason

Did you know that, according to Mr. Dictionary, corruption is defined as dishonest or fraudulent conduct by those in power, typically involving bribery?

And a bribe is defined by Mr. Dictionary as the act of persuading (someone) to act in ones favor, typically illegally or dishonestly, by a gift of money or other inducement.

Meanwhile, Mr. Dictionary also says that censorship is the suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, and information that is considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security.

That begs the questions, why is something that is politically unacceptable included in the definition and who determines what is politically unacceptable? And why am I referring to corruption, bribery and censorship all in the same article?

Its really quite simple. As you can see, Mr. Dictionary ties corruption to those that are in power. It ties bribery to the inducement of corruption. And it ties politics to censorship and security, tying both of those to those in power.

Now, as you are aware, the media is considered the fourth pillar of democracy. Not only does it have to be transparent and unbiased but it also bears the responsibility of educating the masses and the freedom to propagate a variety of opinions. It is THE platform for public discussion and exchange of opinions.

Our founding fathers created an executive, legislative and judicial branch of government for the purpose of each balancing out the others, in a system of checks and balances.

Of course, because they knew how important free speech and freedom of the press was, Im guessing that they might have considered govermentalizing a media branch. But, had they done so, we would not have freedom of the press or any freedom for that matter.

After all, the only way to promote freedom of the press is to keep your fingers off of it. Plus they also had intimate knowledge of the power of the press because they used the media to help create the American Revolution.

So you could say that freedom of the press is what enabled Americans to create America. And without it, there would be no America.

But today censorship is all the rage.

So lets once again look at the definition of censorship: It is the suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, and information that is considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security.

What if someone had published, in advance, the plans for the June 6, 1944 Normandy, France, WWII, D-Day, allied invasion? That would have been a major problem.

To solve the problem you dont censor the press. You improve your security measures.

Today, of course, it would have been used as an excuse to censor.

But lets once again remember that Mr. Dictionary ties corruption to those that are in power, it ties bribery to the inducement of corruption and it ties politics and those in power to censorship and security.

One of Americas most prominent politicians had this to say: I weep for the liberty of my country when I see . . . . . that corruption has been imputed to many members of the House of Representatives, and the rights of the people have been bartered for promises of office.

Who said that? President Andrew Jackson and yet, it is so appropriate for today.

(Kevin Holten is the executive producer of Special Cowboy Moments and Wild Rides on RFD-TV and the Cowboy Channel and the creator of Wild Rides Television, debuting in January 2023. He is a native of Wildrose.)

See original here:

The fourth pillar of democracy: the press - The Journal - Journaltrib

The future of abortion law in the U.S. hinges on the forthcoming ruling in a Supreme Court case, Dobbs v. Jackson Womens Health Organization, but the pro-life movement must begin gearing up to fight another insidious foeBig Tech censorship.

Organizations standing for the sanctity of life are well aware of the uphill battle they face.

The prominent anti-abortion group Live Action had its content censored online long before the docket put the Supreme Courts 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling legalizing abortion nationwide in the crosshairs.

In 2019, social media platform Pinterest added Live Actions website to its blacklist of banned sites. The blacklisting meant users were unable to link to Live Actions content or post it on Pinterest.

The Daily Signal reported that after Live Action attempted to appeal the ban, Pinterest took things a step further and permanently banned its account, claiming the organization violated Pinterests misinformation policies.

Andrew Moore, digital and creative director at pro-life group Susan B. Anthony List, says his organization also has been hit by Big Tech censorship on several occasions.

In 2017, Twitter prevented SBA List from running an ad featuring a pro-life quote by Mother Teresa, claiming our ad violated their policy on promoting the sale of health and pharmaceutical products, Moore said in a statement to The Daily Signal.

In 2020, citing a factually incorrect fact-check by the Dispatch, Facebook banned our ads stating that Joe Biden and Kamala Harris support late-term abortion. Meanwhile, Big Abortion was permitted to run comparable ads without any restrictions.

The examples of Big Tech censorship of pro-life causes are innumerable. But what it all leads back to is that Big Tech is hostile to the anti-abortion movement and has openly thrown its considerable weight behind leftist pro-abortion causes.

That isnt really shocking. Its an open secret that platforms such as Facebook, Google, and Twitter are run by leftists whose sensibilities align more with rabid pro-abortionists.

Where this is likely to become an issue is when pro-abortion activists and their kindred spirits in the Silicon Valley hubs of Big Tech see Roe pared back or even struck down by the high court. A ruling is expected in late June.

The doomsaying surrounding a possible end to Roe already has the far left reeling. Its not hard to imagine a scenario in which the tech titans would push even harder to censor dissenting voices seeking to end or restrict abortion across the country.

Moore says Susan B. Anthony List is expecting a new wave of censorship.

We are prepared for a crackdown on any messaging on abortion that does not fit the narrative of Planned Parenthood and their numerous allies in Silicon Valley, he said, adding:

If the Supreme Court hands the question of abortion back to the people through their legislatures, Big Abortion will stand to have everything to lose. This new reality will motivate their friends in Big Tech to enact even more draconian measures.

As a silver lining, pro-life conservatives are at least aware that censorship will occur and have time to prepare. Pro-abortion forces already have shown their hand, so the pro-life movement knows what to expect if Roe is struck down.

Conservatives should demand transparency and accountability from Big Tech companies thatcensor them. The tech titans shouldnt have the power to hide behind shadowy algorithms and selective enforcement as they repeatedly remove pro-life content.

Recent bills in Georgia and Florida provide a model for consumer protections at the state level. The Georgia legislation has a provision under which Big Tech companies would be forced to provide a report on how frequently they censor content and why they took action. That would give users proof that theyd been censored.

But even if the online gatekeepers prevent pro-life messages from reaching a digital audience, pro-lifers can still take the movement offline.

If Big Tech increases their censorship of pro-life speech in a post-Roe America, pro-life Americans must step up by fostering person-to-person communications, through word of mouth, email, text, and alternative messaging, and social media platforms that have more respect for freedom of speech, Moore said.

The biggest pro-life event each year is the March for Life. Tens of thousands of Americans dedicated to protecting the unborn gather each year in Washington, D.C., to make it clear that life matters.

As it becomes more likely Roe will be struck down, or at least curtailed, the March for Life has begun spinning off marches in states such as Connecticut and California. Pro-life conservatives should attend these marches and organize their own, free from the censoring power of Big Tech.

The radical left will use every trick it has to keep abortion unrestricted, but the pro-life movement ultimately will win. Big Tech can try, but life wont be censored.

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and well consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular We Hear You feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.

View original post here:

Big Abortion's Big Tech Allies Aim to Censor Pro-Lifers. They Won't Win. - Daily Signal

IE 11 is not supported. For an optimal experience visit our site on another browser.

#VelshiBannedBookClub: Sometimes books are banned because of the words, the idea, or the author. In this case its all 3.04:58

Now Playing

Vladimir Kara-Murza: Every independent television network in Russia has been shut down..this war of censorship is complete07:40

UP NEXT

Former U.N. High Commissioner: I have very little doubt people will be prosecuted for war crimes07:00

U.S. Energy Secretary: Is it worth paying a bit more for your gas to not finance this bloody war in Ukraine?05:47

Velshi: We must not stand by as the people of Ukraine - and their freedom - perish03:23

David Miliband on war crimes in Ukraine: Accountability can be slow but its essential03:54

Young People in Ukraine Open Up about how the War has caused a rift in their families06:36

Russias oil and energy industry will deteriorate without EU support: Daniel Yergin04:31

Velshi: Its not okay to look away. Its not enough to say never again04:52

Jane Harman: I think the UN is feckless, Ill say it04:54

Ukrainian MP reacts to Bucha massacre: I cannot get those images out of my head.07:24

On Assignment: NBC Reporters Talk Challenges of Covering the War in Ukraine07:26

Fmr. Estonian President: If you dont respond now, you will be responding when they attack NATO07:18

The life & dealings of an Oligarch trusted by both Russia & Ukraine05:24

Lt. Col (Ret.) Alexander Vindman: Its a travesty that the U.S. is not doing more for Ukraine05:04

Ali Velshi on Lvivs centuries-long history, drifting through war, conflict and empires05:42

Ukrainian opposition party leader Kira Rudik: We want Putin to be prosecuted in Ukraine05:01

Lviv was once a tourist center, now its a humanitarian hub, says citys deputy mayor04:51

Velshi: For some still holding onto a semblance of normalcy in Ukraine, air raid sirens bring life to a halt05:16

We won this battle for Kyiv, Im sure well win the big battle: Ukrainian MP05:33

Vladimir Kara-Murza is a Russian opposition politician, author, and historian who has twice suffered sudden, severe illnesses he believes were brought on by deliberate poisonings while in Moscow as retribution for his speaking out against Russian human rights abuses and lobbying for U.S. sanctions. He tells Ali Velshi that A false reality has been created by the Putin regime here in Russia and a total blackout on information about the invasion of Ukraine. However, despite knowing the dangers of speaking out, Vladimir Kara-Murza is continuing to voice his opposition. This is where I have to be.April 10, 2022

#VelshiBannedBookClub: Sometimes books are banned because of the words, the idea, or the author. In this case its all 3.04:58

Now Playing

Vladimir Kara-Murza: Every independent television network in Russia has been shut down..this war of censorship is complete07:40

UP NEXT

Former U.N. High Commissioner: I have very little doubt people will be prosecuted for war crimes07:00

U.S. Energy Secretary: Is it worth paying a bit more for your gas to not finance this bloody war in Ukraine?05:47

Velshi: We must not stand by as the people of Ukraine - and their freedom - perish03:23

David Miliband on war crimes in Ukraine: Accountability can be slow but its essential03:54

Continue reading here:

Vladimir Kara-Murza: Every independent television network in Russia has been shut down...this war of censorship is complete - MSNBC

The rapper Lowkey, speaking at a rally in support of the persecuted journalist Julian Assange.

For more than a decade, Lowkey has been regarded as an enemy by Israels lobbying network.

Back in 2011, the right-wing Jewish Chronicle described the London-based rappers ability to reach a young audience as a potential nightmare.

Judging by more recent attacks against Lowkey, it would seem that his determination to raise awareness about how Palestinians live under an apartheid system has indeed kept Israels supporters awake at night.

Unable to find flaws in his arguments, the lobby has told lies about him.

An example of how he has been deliberately misquoted came after he made a live appearance on BBC radio in 2017.

He performed Letter to the 1%, a track pledging solidarity with victims of the globalized cosa nostra. Despite obviously referencing the Sicilian mafia, The Jewish Chronicle falsely charged that he had uttered the anti-Semitic phrase kosher nostra.

Due to a threatened lawsuit, the newspaper published a retraction.

The smear campaign against Lowkey has stepped up a gear over the past six months.

In December 2021, the rapper was booked for a gig in Londons Jazz Cafe. The venue came under pressure to call off the show, which celebrated the 10th anniversary of his album Soundtrack to the Struggle.

And in March this year, Lowkey was scheduled to speak at a conference organized by Britains National Union of Students (NUS), marking its centenary.

As soon as the lineup for the event was announced, the journalist Theo Usherwood wrote a series of tweets.

Usherwood, political editor with the radio station LBC, highlighted comments made by Lowkey about how the mainstream media was weaponizing the Jewish heritage of Volodymyr Zelensky, the Ukrainian president, in order to stave off questions about far-right groups in Ukraine.

Although Lowkeys analysis was based on demonstrable facts, Usherwood described it as theorizing.

Following Usherwoods tweets, The Daily Mail, one of Britains most widely read newspapers, published an article on the event to which Lowkey had been invited.

The article featured comments from Nina Freedman, who heads the Union of Jewish Students. She claimed that Lowkey had spread conspiracies about Jewish students, 9/11 and the war in Ukraine.

Although Freedman was quoted at length, the article did not elaborate on the conspiracies she had in mind.

It also did not mention that the Union of Jewish Students is financed by the Israeli embassy in London, as an investigation by Al Jazeera has revealed.

The NUS was vilified by the Campaign Against Antisemitism another Israel lobby group over how it responded to complaints about the invitation to Lowkey.

The NUS recommended that people who took umbrage at Lowkeys views could avoid listening to him and even offered a safe space where they could go during his appearance. Yet the Campaign Against Antisemitism distorted that offer as a suggestion that the Jewish students literally segregate themselves.

Some elected politicians even got involved in efforts to bully the NUS.

Andrew Percy, a member of the British Parliament, described the offer of a safe space to offended students as sinister. He called on Larissa Kennedy, president of the NUS, to resign.

Another MP Robert Halfon contended that Britains Equalities and Human Rights Commission should investigate the NUS for what he alleged was institutional anti-Semitism.

Both Percy and Halfon have held senior positions with Conservative Friends of Israel, a pressure group inside Britains ruling party.

The NUS capitulated to the pressure.

Lowkey was dropped from the conference to which he was invited. Instead, it was proposed that he could have a role in a fringe event marking the NUS centenary.

When Lowkey refused to accept that proposal, the NUS claimed dishonestly that he had simply pulled out of the conference.

The bullying did not go unchallenged.

The group Palestine Action best known for smashing up Israeli weapons factories protested against how Lowkey had been canceled by scaling the roof of the venue where the NUS celebrated its 100th birthday.

According to Palestine Action, a number of students active in the NUS took part in that protest.

Speaking to The Electronic Intifada, Lowkey pointed out that Akehursts group is known to work with Israels government.

The calls for censorship which have been opposed by the actor Mark Ruffalo, the rapper Wretch 32 and the rock star Roger Waters among many others are ultimately an own goal, Lowkey added.

Artists and musicians should never have to fear threats to their livelihood or person for the music they make, he added. We will not be silenced on Palestine. Not now, not ever.

Kit Klarenberg is an investigative journalist exploring the role of intelligence services in shaping politics and perceptions. Twitter: @KitKlarenberg.

Continue reading here:

Lobby scores own goal with attempts to censor Lowkey - The Electronic Intifada

On Saturday, a Brazilian political official ordered Lollapalooza Brazil to ban political demonstrations from its future events after Marina and other performers shared their distaste for the countrys government on stage the night before. Now, the Welsh artist is speaking out against artist censorship.

Censorship is still alive and well, she wrote on Twitter Tuesday, referring to the electoral judges order calling for a $10,500 fine for any artist who uses the Lollapalooza stage to address politics. Marina and Pabllo Vittar were among the artists who were named in the judges order after speaking out against the countrys far-right president Jair Bolsonaro during their sets at Lollapalooza in what the official called propaganda and premature campaigning. Brazils election is set for later this year.

We need to stick together. Im just sick of a certain kind of energy. Fuck Putin. Fuck Bolsonaro. Fuck him! Marina said on stage at the So Paulo festival on Friday. We are sick of this energy. We are sick of it. You are the new generation and things are going to change.

So many of us are sick of these old men who think they own the countries they lead They dont own anything, she wrote in a second tweet. And they are weaker than we think. When people feel they have no power they try to take it away from others.

Brazilian popstar Pabllo Vittar shared a similar message on stage when she performed at the festival, yelling, Get out Bolsonaro! She wore a red towel featuring the image of Lula da Silva, the leftist politician who is running against Bolsonaro and is poised to win, according to polls in Brazil. Rapper Emicida promoted voter registration during her set, before chanting, Hey Bolsonaro, take it in the ass, according to The Guardian.

Earlier this week, superstar Anitta laughed at the fine proposed by the Brazilian official, writing on Twitter, one less bag. She added, Does this law apply abroad? Because my festivals are only international.

Marinas sentiment seems to echo that of many young Brazilians and her fans, many of whom are queer who oppose the leadership of Bolsonaro in Brazil, who has espoused anti-gay rhetoric.

Her statements at the festival also align with the feminist, forward-thinking lyrics of her songs, Purge the Poison and Mans World. (Vittar is featured on a remix of Poison.) I want to see change, she toldPeople last year. The world we live in really lacks femininity. We need more feminine so we can connect with Earth and nature. So that we care again.

A rep for Lollapalooza did not immediately respond to Rolling Stones request for comment.

Read the original post:

Censorship Is Still Alive and Well: Marina Slams Brazilian Governments Attempt to Silence Musicians - Rolling Stone

Childrens authors and performers say growing censorship, institutional timidity and online backlash are resulting in stories about diversity, sexuality and even contemporary world events being deemed inappropriate for younger readers.

It feels like were living through a second section 28, but one that the UK government has outsourced to an anonymous Twitter lobby, one performer says.

When acclaimed gay author Simon James Green was banned from school visits in the south of England by the Catholic church last month, it drew attention to what many believe is a developing trend that mirrors the escalating censorship of childrens reading in the US, described by Art Speigelman recently as a culture war thats totally out of control.

Savita Kalhan was expecting to take a school assembly with a group of teenagers for World Book Day recently. She planned to touch on themes of respect and consent that appear in her young adult novels That Asian Kid about institutional racism in schools and The Girl in the Broken Mirror which includes a sexual assault. But the event was cancelled because the deputy head deemed her work inappropriate.

Since then, Ive had lots of school librarians message me to say they believe the situation is getting much worse and more widespread, with a backlash against certain topics from school management and parents, Kalhan says. There seems to be a fear of something that might or might not happen, and its unnecessarily affecting childrens choice of reading.

Young adult books, covering diversity, sexuality, even contemporary world events, are now being deemed unsuitable for teenage readers, she adds. This is completely out of touch with what teenagers are actually reading and watching, and the expertise of librarians themselves is completely overlooked.

Juno Dawson author and former teacher, whose acclaimed sexuality handbook for young people, This Book is Gay, is the subject of removal petitions in the US agrees there is a shift in mood.

Its part of a wider culture war, she suggests, now gaining traction in the UK. You cant stop a kid being trans or LGBT but you can stop a book. A lot of these attempts to have books pulled or readings cancelled feel vexatious, so huge credit to the librarians and teachers who are dealing with irate parents and campaigners.

Elle McNicoll joined Simon James Green on the platform for the Bristol Teen Book Awards the week after his ban, which she describes as sending a painful message to young gay pupils.

Ive seen the absolute force for good that Simon is when he visits a school, and Im just sorry that some children will be denied that joy.

McNicolls latest book, Like a Charm, includes a dyspraxic protagonist; her debut featured a heroine who is autistic, like McNicoll herself.

Diverse authors take on a lot more than questions about plot and story, she argues. Were also often expected to fix societal problems or defend ourselves outside of our work.

Hazel Plowman, head of creative learning at the Bath Childrens Literature festival, says there has been a definite shift towards more inclusive stories in children and young peoples books since she started working there a decade ago.

Were programming our autumn festival, and while theres still work to do, we are getting all kinds of voices pitched as commercial books now, rather than being pigeonholed as an issues book for example. There are LGBTQ+ books for all ages, picture books with two mums, British-Indian detectives and neurodiverse authors and characters.

Jodie Lancet-Grant is one of the authors Plowman lists. Her debut picture book for 37 year olds, The Pirate Mums a swashbuckling adventure about a boy called Billy who happens to have two mothers attracted some trolling earlier this year. The idea that anyone would think this story is not appropriate for children beggars belief. Its just a different family circumstance, but its incredibly important that children see that represented.

There is a worrying trend of censorship of LGBTQ+ authors and books happening as a consequence of the more polarised world we are living in, she says, suggesting that section 28 the legislation enacted in 1988 to prohibit the promotion of homosexuality by local authorities and only abolished in 2003 still has an impact. A lot of adults grew up not reading about these subjects because of clause 28, and now assume they are not acceptable because they accepted that absence as children.

Drag performers have attracted particular controversy, with a number of schools caught out in recent years after booking an act seen as having a non-child friendly name or online presence. Sab Samuel AKA Aida H Dee, childrens author and founder of Drag Queen Story Hour UK, is clear that not all drag acts are suitable for education, but believes that schools and local councils are becoming increasingly aware of the potential for backlash, and consequently steering clear of anything that could be deemed risky.

Adam Carver, whose drag performance for kids Palaver! generated complaints to local authorities and the Arts Council England last year, is blunt: It feels like were living through a second section 28, but one that the UK government has outsourced to an anonymous Twitter lobby.

Carvers company, Fatt Projects, is working on a model to support arts organisations facing similar attacks, offering advice on how best to respond to criticism.

There is a resurgence of the idea that queer people shouldnt be around children, he says. There is a perfect storm now where venues and organisations are so afraid of backlash that they dont take any risks. But there is still demand from children and families for work that explores difference.

View original post here:

Out of touch: childrens authors describe increasing censorship of books on diversity - The Guardian

On Saturday, Facebook deleted a popular anti-war video produced by the Sozialistische Gleichheitspartei (Socialist Equality Party, SGP) without providing any reason. The video, titled No Third World War! Against Ukraine war, NATO aggression and German rearmament! had been viewed over 20,000 times within a few days.

The SGP called on Facebook on Sunday to immediately reverse the deletion. We are exercising our constitutional right to participate in the formation of political opinions with the video, the party stated in its appeal, but the corporation did not give any response. The deletion can therefore only be seen as an act of political censorship directed against the SGPs independent anti-war perspective. We call on all readers to oppose this censorship and use all their channels on social media and beyond to protest against it in the strongest possible terms.

In the video, SGP Chair, Christoph Vandreier, and German WSWS Editor-in-Chief, Johannes Stern, unequivocally condemn the Russian governments war. But they also explain how it was provoked by the wars conducted by the United States and its European allies over the past 30 years and the military encirclement of Russia by NATO.

They make it clear that a proxy war is being waged in Ukraine between NATO and Russia at the expense of the population, which threatens to end in a nuclear world war. The only way to prevent a catastrophe, Vandreier and Stern explain, is to unite Russian and Ukrainian workers as part of an international, socialist movement against war and its root: capitalism.

This analysis and perspective struck a nerve, and reached tens of thousands of people on Facebook in a short time. The video received over 150 likes, was shared 140 times, and commented on 120 times. It expresses widespread opposition to NATOs warmongering, which is suppressed in the official media, which instead provides a torrent of deafening war propaganda aimed at all-out war against Russia, and ultimately, China.

The weekend the video was deleted, US President Biden declared that regime change in Russia was a goal of American foreign policy and announced a decades-long state of war. Germanys Chancellor Scholz made similar statements when he defended the tripling of the war budget on Sunday so that Germany would once again be able to wage war against Russia.

This insane drive towards a third world war is rejected by the vast majority. That is why the media have switched into war propaganda mode and will not allow discussion of even the most basic questions. The censorship that is now to be imposed is the desperate response to the fact that this propaganda is fooling fewer and fewer people and masses of workers are looking for an independent perspective against the war.

Censorship measures by governments in collaboration with the tech giants have been systematically increasing for years. In 2017, Google announced that it would favour authoritative sources in search results in the future. At the same time, socialist and anti-war websites, and in particular the World Socialist Web Site, were censored and banished from search results.

Facebook has hired more than 20,000 people to monitor posts on its platform and censor undesirable posts. Many of these employees have intelligence or law enforcement backgrounds and work closely with the US government. In Germany, the close cooperation of tech companies with the government has even been regulated by law through the Network Enforcement Act.

In the last year, Facebook has already tried twice to censor the International Committee of the Fourth International (ICFI), of which the SGP is the German section. On January 22, Facebook blocked the accounts of prominent representatives of the ICFI and of local sections of the party in the US, and only restored them on 25 January after massive protest. A month later, Facebook prevented users from sharing the WSWS article Washington Posts Wuhan lab conspiracy theory stands exposed. Facebooks reasoning was that the article was spreading misinformation. In May, the company was forced to admit the untenability of this statement and unblocked the article.

Facebooks censorship is directly linked to the German governments efforts to silence the SGP and criminalise any opposition to war. In 2018, the Interior Ministry had for the first time included the SGP in its annual secret service report as being left-wing extremist and defamed it as anti-constitutional. After the SGP filed a complaint against this, the ministry justified the surveillance of the party by the intelligence agencies on the grounds that simply arguing for a democratic, egalitarian, socialist society and agitation against alleged imperialism and militarism were unconstitutional.

In response to this attack, the SGP stated in July 2019: The attack invokes the criminal traditions of authoritarianism and fascism in Germany. The Interior Ministrys attack on the SGP is intended to set a dangerous precedent. It will be used to legitimize state action against organizations, groups and individuals who oppose social inequality, environmental destruction, state repression, the buildup of the military or other injustices of capitalist society. This was confirmed once again when the Berlin Administrative Court backed the federal government in its legal ruling.

Facebooks censorship of the SGPs anti-war video confirms these warnings. In the face of growing social inequality, the murderous profits before lives policy in the pandemicand above all the reckless course towards a world waranyone who opposes the war drive and policies in the interests of the rich is to be suppressed.

The struggle against the suppression of the SGP, which ultimately targets any opposition to the official war policy, is therefore of utmost importance. The censorship by Facebook and the German government can only be stopped by the mobilisation of the international working class. Therefore, spread this article and protest against the censorship on all channels. Use the hashtags #defendSGP, #StopCensoringSocialism and #SpeakOutAgainstWW3 and share the video that has been censored by Facebook.

Sign up for the WSWS email newsletter

Visit link:

Stop Facebook's censorship of the SGP's anti-war video! - WSWS

This is a version of an article published in the Out of Frame Weekly, an email newsletter about the intersection of art, culture, and ideas. Sign up here to get it in your inbox every Friday.

In this newsletter, we often talk about how social media companies decide what content is and isnt allowed solely based on the subjective opinions of people who run the platforms. And this week gifted us two glorious examples.

The Intercept reported that Facebook will allow users to praise the Azov Battalion, a Ukrainian White nationalist paramilitary group, in contradiction to the social network's policy banning support for "dangerous individuals and organizations." According to the United Nations, the Azov Battalion raped and tortured civilians in 2014.

Facebook said it made the change to "allow Facebook users to obtain information about the forces' military activity" and "ensure that news coverage of the conflict can continue to be shared on the platform," according to Insider. It is unclear why this change was necessary to allow that, but that may speak to bigger problems in how Facebook's rules conflict with users' ability to freely share information.

Facebook also made an exception to its hate speech policy to allow statements like "death to the Russian invaders" and calling for violence against Russian president Vladimir Putin and his ally, Belarussian president Aleksandr Lukashenko.

The change only applies in several countries in the Caucasus and Central and Eastern Europe, including Russia, where Facebook is currently banned.

People should rightfully condemn the Russian invasion of Ukraine. But these actions by Facebook, along with decisions to ban propaganda from only one side in the war, demonstrate that decisions that should be made on some kind of objective principle are instead being made on the basis of team sport. Policies are chosen on the basis of trying to help "the good guys" and harm "the bad guys." What is the objective reason that people should be allowed to call for the death of Putin and Lukashenko but not any of the world's dozens of other dictators?

This shows that while banning "false information" or "hate speech" sounds good in theory, in practice it is not so simple, and the execution is prone to political bias.

View post:

The Most Blatantly Biased Social Media Censorship Decisions of the Week | Matt Hampton - Foundation for Economic Education

On March 27, YouTube removed the entire archive of six years of Chris Hedges On Contact from its platform without any notice or explanation. Even though very few of Hedges shows referenced Russia or Vladimir Putin directly, his association with RT America as well as his opposition to NATO warmongering was all that was required for YouTube to delete hundreds of hours of interviews on a range of political subjects that were critical of both the Democrats and Republicans.

The World Socialist Web Site denounces the malicious and anti-democratic suppression of the archive of On Contact and demands that full public access to it be immediately restored.

As reported previously by the World Socialist Web Site, the Russian state-funded cable news network RT America was shut down in the US on March 3 and all 120 of its employees were laid off at offices located in New York City, Washington D.C., Los Angeles and Miami.

Although the management of the news channel said the network had experienced unforeseen business-interruption events, the abrupt shutdown of RT America was no doubt part of the anti-Russian offensive mounted by corporate media outlets and governments aligned with the US and NATO in the proxy war being fought in Ukraine against the regime in Moscow.

Among the RT America programs terminated were several popular left-wing and anti-war TV shows including Redacted Tonight with Lee Camp and On Contact with Chris Hedges. These programs were specifically targeted for censorship because they adopted an anti-war standpoint that was opposed to the narrative developed by the ruling political establishment in the US and Europe.

This campaign to silence voices critical of the role of imperialism in provoking the war in Ukraine has been extended to the removal of video content from YouTube, podcasts from Spotify and other censorship measures by the social media platforms Facebook and Twitter.

Hedges had denounced as a war of aggression the invasion of Ukraine by Russia. But he went on to explain the war in historical context and suggested that the betrayal of agreements with Moscow, which he covered as a reporter in Eastern Europe during the dissolution of the USSR, as well as the expansion of NATO on the perimeter of Russia likely baited Putin to invade Ukraine.

In a statement published on Substack, Hedges wrote of the censorship by YouTube, The entire archive of On Contact, the Emmy-nominated show I hosted for six years for RT America and RT International, has been disappeared from YouTube. I received no inquiry or notice from YouTube. I vanished. In totalitarian systems you exist, then you dont.

Hedges went on to explain that the lack of oppositional content in the mainstream media was one of the reasons he was on RT in the first place, I was on RT because, as a critic of US imperialism, militarism, the corporate control of the two ruling parties, and especially because I support the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement against Israel, I was blacklisted.

Hedges denounced the Democrats for being the biggest advocates of online political censorship in the US, The most vocal cheerleaders for this censorship are the liberal class. Democrats in the U.S. Congress have held hearings with the CEOs of social media companies pressuring them to do more to censor content. Banish the troglodytes. Then we will have social cohesion.

He also drew broader conclusions about the meaning of the removal of his programs from YouTube, Julian Assange and Edward Snowden exposed the truth about the criminal inner workings of power. Look where they are now. This censorship is one step removed from Joseph Stalins airbrushing of nonpersons such as Leon Trotsky out of official photographs. It is a destruction of our collective memory. It removes the efforts to examine our reality in ways the ruling class does not appreciate. The goal is to foster historical amnesia. If we dont know what happened in the past, we cannot make sense of the present.

The actions of YouTube, which is owned by Googles corporate parent Alphabet Inc., are part of a coordinated effort by the big social media platforms to silence anyone who does not adopt the political line of the White House and US State Department and label them as Russian propaganda.

Other recent developments include the decision by Twitter as of February 28 to label the tweets of those who worked at RT America with a message that says, Russia state-affiliated media. Absurdly, this includes the Twitter account of Ed Schultz, the former host of MSNBCs The Ed Show and, starting in 2016, the host of News with Ed Schultz on RT America. Schultzs Twitter account now has the Russian state media label even though he died of natural causes on July 5, 2018.

Also reported previously on the WSWS, comedian and activist Lee Camps 500 hours and eight years of video archive of Redacted Tonight was removed from YouTube and his podcast Moment of Clarity was removed from Spotify. In a recent post, Camp called the anti-Russian censorship McCarthyism, We live in a world of immense censorship that is increasing every day. America claims to be this is the place where we have freedom of press or freedom of speech and yet they are deleting everything that is possibly anti-war and anti-imperialist.

On Saturday, Facebook deleted a popular anti-war video produced by the Sozialistische Gleichheitspartei (Socialist Equality Party, SGP) without explanation. The video, No Third World War! Against Ukraine war, NATO aggression and German rearmament! resonated with the public and had been viewed over 20,000 times within a few days before it was removed.

The video gained a following because it presented a fundamental truth about the present danger of a world war with nuclear weapons. The SGP both condemned the Putin regimes war in Ukraine and explained how the conflict was provoked by the encirclement of Russia by NATO and the wars conducted by the US and its European allies over the past thirty years.

The new round of online censorship is a continuation of the campaign mounted by the tech monopolies under the direction of the intelligence state apparatus that began in 2017 to prevent anti-capitalist and revolutionary socialist political ideas from reaching wide layers of the working class. With the development of the Internet, and especially social media, over the past three decades, the ruling elite fears that its grip on information and political analysis through traditional corporate media channels has been significantly undermined.

The World Socialist Web Site views as a basic responsibility the defense of all progressive and left-wing individuals and political tendencies against government instigated censorship and repression. We therefore urge all supporters and readers to circulate this statement as widely as possible in order to build public support for the restoration of access to Hedges On Contact archive.

Foreword to the German edition of David Norths Quarter Century of War

Johannes Stern, 5 October 2020

After three decades of US-led wars, the outbreak of a third world war, which would be fought with nuclear weapons, is an imminent and concrete danger.

Read more from the original source:

Six years of Chris Hedges' On Contact program erased by YouTube - WSWS