Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News,

App store gatekeepers Apple, Google Play and Amazon could all decide to deplatform Twitter itself following new owner Elon Musks commitment to free speech, according to a report.

Speculation over app stores potentially targeting Twitter intensified after Apple executive Phil Schiller deactivated his Twitter account for no apparent reason days after Donald Trump was restored to the platform.

Twitter users also noticed that the official Apple account itself had apparently removed all of its tweets, although it was later revealed that this was nothing new.

According to areportby Fast Company, Musk is playing a dangerous game that could spell game over for the platform he just bought by his supposed failure to moderate impose stringent moderation.

Musks platforming of hateful content could get Twitter itself deplatformed, writes Clint Rainey, adding that the company could be on a collision course with app store gatekeepers.

Rainey and his ilk are mad that Musk has culled the number of moderators employed to track harmful content and enforce Twitters rules against it.

Showcasing again how journalists now weaponize their platforms to try to chill free speech, Fast Company contacted Apple, Google and Amazon to ask them if they planned to deplatform the Twitter app itself, but none responded.

The article notes how both Parler and Truth Social were at one stage banned from app stores before they were forced to agree to more draconian moderation policies.

While its incredibly unlikely that the Twitter app itself would ever be deplatformed, the gatekeepers could follow the example of advertisers by putting pressure on Musk to impose tighter censorship, therefore derailing the billionaires stated goal to free the bird and restore true freedom of speech.

Given that Apple is also likely to take a large cut of Twitters new $8 subscription service, a financial motive is also in place to maintain a good relationship with Musk.

Much of the hysteria seems to be based around Musk allowing accounts that had been unfairly banned or suspended on the platform, such as those operated by the Babylon Bee and Jordan Peterson, to return.

Trump himself returning to the platform, despite insisting he has no plans to actually use his account again, has also instilled terror into censorious leftists who fear they are losing power over the ability to shut down adversarial voices.

* * *

Brandnew merchnow available! Get it athttps://www.pjwshop.com/

In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch. I need you to sign up for my free newsletterhere. Support my sponsor Turbo Force a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown. Get early access, exclusive content and behind the scenes stuff by following me onLocals.

Loading...

Go here to see the original:

App Store 'Gatekeepers' Urged To Deplatform "Dangerous" Twitter Itself

1. 'Deplatforming the President': Twitter Files Part 3 reveals events that led to removal of Donald Trump  Business Today
2. 'Deplatforming The President': Elon Musk Sheds Light On Ouster Of Donald Trump In Twitter Files Part 3  ABP Live
3. Twitter Files 3.0 reveal how Donald Trump was deplatformed by 'Supreme Court of moderation'  WION
4. Twitter Files Part 3 reveals how top execs interfered with US election before ban on Trump  Republic World
5. Trump Is Using the Twitter Files to Fundraise for 2024  Rolling Stone
6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Originally posted here:

'Deplatforming the President': Twitter Files Part 3 reveals events that led to removal of Donald Trump - Business Today

An imageshared on Facebook purports Twitter CEO Elon Musk called users a bunch of babies addicted to the drama in regards to former President Donald Trump being reinstated.

This tweet is digitally fabricated. Musk did not make this comment.

Musk has restored several Twitter accounts that were previously suspended, including psychologist Jordan Peterson and Trump,CBS News reported. Musk recently announced he will not be restoring radio host and conspiracy theorist Alex Jones account on the platform,CNN reported.

The Facebook image claims to show a screenshot from Musks Twitter account addressing reactions to Trumps Twitter account being reinstated. The alleged tweet was made the morning of Nov. 20 with over 6,000 retweets.

If you dont like Trumps reinstatement or the way Im running Twitter or getting several daily push notifications from my account, then delete the app, the alleged tweet reads. For as much as youre all stomping and crying, I know you wont because youre a bunch of babies addicted to the drama.(RELATED: Is PayPal Fining Users $2,500 For Misinformation?)

The image is digitally fabricated. This post appears nowhere on Musksverified Twitteraccount. There is also no record of it on the deleted tweet tracker website,Politwoops by ProPublica. There are also nocredible news reportssuggesting Musk had lambasted twitter users with these comments.

Musk has been quite outspoken about his disapproval for Twitter users who disagree with the way he is running the app. Several tweets show Musk calling them judgy hall monitors, boasting about the success of the platform since his takeover and even memes about the criticism and misinformation.

The Twitter CEO did respond to criticism of the decision to reverse the suspension in a reply tweet to comedian Tim Young. The language featured in the tweet, however, was not comparable to the Facebook post.

The important thing is that Twitter correct a grave mistake in banning his account, despite no violation of the law or terms of service, the tweet read. Deplatforming a sitting President undermined public trust in Twitter for half of America.

This is not the first time false information about Musk has been shared on social media. Check Your Fact recentlydebunkeda post claiming Musk destroyed a Russian aircraft carrier.

Go here to read the rest:

FACT CHECK: Did Elon Musk Call Twitter Users Upset By Trumps ...

Twitter Files Part 2: Top Twitter execs interfered with US election before banning Donald Trump  msnNOW

More here:

Twitter Files Part 2: Top Twitter execs interfered with US election before banning Donald Trump - msnNOW

Conservatives are defending rapper Kanye West in the wake of the artist posting multiple antisemitic statement over the weekend including that he was going to go death con 3 on JEWISH PEOPLE resulting in a restriction of his Instagram and Twitter accounts.

Following the rebukes, right-wing commentators jumped at the opportunity to rail against the media and platforms enforcing content standards, rather than criticizing Wests antisemitism. The constant hypocrisy from the media is at an all-time high, Indiana Attorney General Todd Rioka tweeted on Sunday. They have now gone after Kanye for his new fashion line, his independent thinking, & for having opposing thoughts from the norm of Hollywood.

Rioka responded to backlash by claiming he was specifically addressing Wests criticism of the media and that he is 100% supportive of the Jewish community and Israel.

Wests comments followed a contentious week for the artist. He was lambasted by fans and industry names after displaying White Lives Matter shirts at his Paris Fashion Week Yeezy show. He then sat down with Fox News host Tucker Carlson for a two-part interview, and took to social media to bash friends and artists who had reached out to him to express their discomfort with the Fashion Week stunt. In one text exchange posted to Instagram, West told fellow rapper Diddy that he would show the Jews that told you to call me that no one can threaten or influence me. Instagrams parent company Meta issued a 24-hour suspension as a result.

West also posted to Twitter for the first time since 2020, attacking Meta founder and CEO Mark Zuckerburg for the ban before posting his plan to attack JEWISH PEOPLE late Saturday night. The funny thing is I actually cant be Anti Semitic because black people are actually Jew also, West wrote.

Tesla billionaire Elon Musk, who is currently embroiled in a litigious battle over his attempt to buy Twitter, had on Friday congratulated West on his return to the platform. Musk has promised to drastically roll back content moderation policies should his bid to acquire the social media platform be finalized.Editors picks

Rioka was one of several conservatives to bash the media and social media companies following Wests comments. On Fox News, the hosts of Fox & Friends Sunday argued that while Wests remarks were ugly, removing them from public debate through censorship wouldnt actually do anything to curb the spread of antisemitism. Is censorship and silence the appropriate reaction to actually accomplish the goal of a world with less racism and antisemitism? wondered host Will Cain.

Ironically, some readers appear to have had their comments on articles about Wests antisemitic posts removed from the Fox News website for violating the content policy of the site.

Fox News did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Rolling Stone.

Others highlighted the bans over the antisemitic remarks that prompted them, characterizing Wests punishment as retaliation for his conservative opinions. Terrible, right-wing conspiracy theorist and documentarian Dinseh DSouza wrote of West being banned for Twitter for saying he was going to go after the Jews. Twitter dropped the hammer on the famed Trump supporter, added former Trump White House minion Sebastian Gorka. Pizzagate conspiracy theorist Mike Cernovich dismissed Wests comment as meta-commentary that lacked delicate hands and said critics of the rapper were motivated by hate.

Jason Whitlock of The Blaze tweeted that Black rappers and comedians are free to denigrate black people and white men a million different ways and that theres a line they better not cross. And everybody knows it.Related

When asked what the line is, Whitlock wrote that its questioning black entertainers unhealthy relationship with non-religious Jewish power brokers in HollywoodTrending

Whitlocks former Blaze colleague Elijah Schaffer, who was recently fired from the company after reports that he sexually harrassed a coworker, wrote that removing posts like Kanyes removes healthy public debate as if a call to go death con three on Jewish people is something that merits serious consideration.

The American Jewish Committee doesnt agree. Kanye West has had a streak of rants this week that is remarkable even by his standards, it said in a statement. If he wants to have any credibility as a commentator on social issues, let alone as a musician, maybe he can start by figuring out how to make a point without fomenting hatred of Jews.

Original post:

Conservatives Are Mad Kanye Is Being Censored for Antisemitism ...

Putins Lack of a Grand Strategy

by Srdja Trifkovic

Vladimir Putin lacks the kind of grand vision and decisive temperament needed to make Russia a highly respected world power in the current global environment.

by Roger D. McGrath

California has been living off its legacy of water projects for the last several decades like a lazy, self-indulgent, trust-fund recipient.

by Edward Welsch

Just as a conquering army defaces the monuments of its defeated foes, Americas woke film industry has seized the opportunity in Rings of Power to have its way with the mythology of Tolkien's Men of the West.

by Jack Trotter

In her unguarded moments, South Carolina politician Krystle Mathews provided a glimpse into the philosophy and methods of racial intimidation used by some blacks to gain and maintain political power.

by Stanley G. Payne

One of the last great leftist myths of the 20th century is that the Spanish Civil War was a struggle of republican democracy against nationalist fascism. In reality, it was a violent mass-collectivist revolution put down by Spanish moderates and conservatives.

by Daniel McCarthy

Michael Oakeshott warned that rationalism in politics leads to rigid, rule-bound governance, and to the imposition of the state's enterprise over and against the free association of individuals.

by Stephen B. Presser

Gordon Wood shows how far we have drifted from the Founding Fathers' vision of a polity that would limit arbitrary power in order that the government might serve the people rather than tyrannize them.

Follow this link:

Chronicles Magazine : A Magazine of American Culture

The recent politically-tinted PayPal trouble in the UK does not seem to have died the same ignoble and (un)deserved in nature, anonymous death as so many cases over the recent years have when Big Tech and their subsidiaries/minions have been called to task, as essentially the agents to stifle whatever speech went against the Big Narrative.

The no reaction to accounts getting blocked for legitimate political reasons would have been happening due to, quite simply put, politics.

So is it okay to cancel a person’s PayPal account on account of their political stance in a democracy?

As far as UK legislators, it now looks like this conundrum seems to be getting close to a solution.

At the moment, there seems to be some positive political climate change in the UK at least, and adhering to the very bottom of the democratic low bar of free speech it would mean that it is not okay to simply cut off people from international payment systems, just because of their political stance.

In the UK, some questions about how this whole system of manufactured consent works started appearing a while back, not least when the Daily Sceptic, the Free Speech Union, and associated individual accounts started getting hit with the censorship hammer for things that just can no longer be discussed in a democracy (like Covid vaccines, Ukraine war, or any other kind of established by nature of corporate media narrative.)

It’s not all bad news, though MP Sally Ann Hart has put forward a Financial Services and Markets Bill amendment that would, if passed, allow UK-based customers to still use the PayPal system, even if the company dislikes it.

We obtained a copy of the amendment proposals for you here.

It’s included in the House of Commons NC15 point of the document to deal with refusal to provide services for reasons connected to (anti) freedom of expression.

The long and the short of the proposal is this:

No payment service provider providing a relevant service may refuse to supply that service to any other person in the United Kingdom if the reason for the refusal is significantly related to the customer exercising his or her right to freedom of expression.

Link:

PayPal's ideological deplatforming spurs proposed UK amendment to stop ...

Author Ryan T. Anderson said his book, "When Harry Became Sally: Responding to the Transgender Moment," has been removed from Amazon and critics pointed out that the online retailer has a history of censoring books that dont coincide with the companys liberal political views.

"I hope youve already bought your copy, cause Amazon just removed my book "When Harry Became Sally: Responding to the Transgender Moment" from their cyber shelves.... my other four books are still available (for now)," Anderson tweeted.

ALEX BERENSON'S CORONAVIRUS BOOKLET HITS AMAZON AFTER ELON MUSK, OTHERS CALL OUT ONLINE RETAILER FOR 'CENSORSHIP'

"When Harry Became Sally," which has previously been on Amazons bestseller list, aimed to provide "thoughtful answers to questions arising from our transgender moment" and offered a "a balanced approach to public policy on gender identity, and a sober assessment of the human costs of getting human nature wrong."

Author Ryan T. Anderson said his book, "When Harry Became Sally: Responding to the Transgender Moment," has been removed from Amazon. (Reuters)

A search of Amazon for "When Harry Became Sally" on Monday doesnt find Andersons book, instead suggesting books with the opposite view such as "The End of Gender: Debunking the Myths about Sex and Identity in Our Society," "Understanding Gender Dysphoria: Navigating Transgender Issues in a Changing Culture" and "Let Harry Become Sally: Responding to the Anti-Transgender Moment."

Amazon did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

"While you cant buy the book on Amazon, you can still get it (for now?) at Barnes and Noble. Given the aggressive push on trans policies coming from the Biden admin, now is a great time to read it. Buy it before you no longer can," Anderson added in a follow-up tweet.

Dispatch writer David French blasted the move as "absurd and unacceptable," while New York Times columnist Ross Douthatsuggested Amazon was "conducting an experiment in what they can get away with."

ATTEMPT TO CENSOR BOOK ON TRANSGENDER CRAZE BACKFIRED, CRITICS SAY: THIS IS THE SO-CALLED STREISAND EFFECT

Target also sparked an outcry amongcritics last year when the big box retailer announced it was pulling "Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters,"because oneTwitteruser deemed the book transphobic. Target reversed its decision amidbacklash.

Many others took to Twitter with their thoughts on the situation:

Last year,Alex Berensonsbooklet on coronavirus, "Unreported Truths about COVID-19 and Lockdowns: Part 1," became the No. 1 best seller inAmazons Kindle Storeafter the online retailer initially told Berenson it didnt meet the companys guidelines.

The former New York Times reporter quickly launched a protest on Twitter, calling the move "outrageous censorship from a company that gained hugely from lockdown" as millions wereforced to shop online. SpaceX CEO Elon Musk and other prominent journalists defended Berenson, and Amazon eventually allowed the book to be sold on its platform.

CLICK HERE FOR THE FOX NEWS APP

Amazon told Fox News it was an "error" and the book shouldnt have been held up, but Berenson had his doubts.

"They didnt say to me that it was a mistake I do believe that Im not the only person who has run into this. They need to be clear what their position is on publishing controversial material on political issues," Berenson told Fox News at the time. "It doesnt seem to me that this was an error, but I dont know."

Brian Flood is a media reporter for Fox News Digital. Story tips can be sent tobrian.flood@fox.comand on Twitter: @briansflood.

See the original post here:

Amazon accused of absurd and unacceptable censorship after book ...

Dexerto

Published: 2022-10-07T17:17:03

Updated: 2022-10-07T17:17:24

Its been almost two months since controversial influencer Andrew Tate was banned from all major social media platforms, and the numbers reflect his overall popularity has taken a drastic downturn.

On August 19, 2022, Hustlers University founder and TateSpeech co-host Andrew Tate received a ban from Meta, removing his presence from both Instagram and Facebook. This followed a ban from Twitter years prior.

In the days that followed, Tate would also receive a ban from YouTube and TikTok, followed by a self-removal of his TateSpeech channel from Twitch. Despite being one of the most significant instances of deplatforming weve seen in recent history, Tate would let the world know via his new social platforms that he didnt feel canceled.

But despite how the crypto trading mogul may feel, the numbers reflect a drastic dip in popularity. Once boasting the title of the most searched man on the internet, his relevance has seen a steep decline as his popularity diminishes.

Tates popularity peaked between August 21 and 27 in the middle of his deplatforming with the former kickboxer making headlines across the internet. But it wouldnt take long before Andrew Tates search volume would drop by 60%, with his name being searched fewer and fewer times each day.

But his decline in popularity goes beyond Googles search metrics. Hes no longer making frequent guest appearances on podcasts, hes not been on Twitch since he removed his channel, and TikTok where he garnered most of his followers via fan accounts has stopped exposing its users to his content.

Outside of mainstream social media, Tates newfound homes on free speech platforms Rumble and Gettr have seen a fraction of the traction his Instagram, Twitch streams, and YouTube videos once received.

For reference, Andrew Tate posts a video on his TateSpeech Rumble channel at least once every two days. However, outside of his Emergency Meeting podcast episodes, these videos rarely break 100k views. But during his last day on YouTube, it wasnt uncommon for the TateSpeech YouTube channel to get several hundreds of thousands of views in a single day.

However, TateSpeech on Rumble has just 100k fewer subscribers than his YouTube channel had, showing that while the majority of his fans may have followed him over to Rumble not nearly as many of them are consuming his content.

There has been a lot of pushback from larger personalities on the internet when it comes to deplatforming. Some free speech advocates are completely against the idea of banning someone from major sites, while others believe deplatforming doesnt even work because that persons ideas are still present on the internet. Yet, if statistics are anything to go by, it seems as if deplatforming Andrew Tate has caused a major blow to his relevance.

The rest is here:

Andrew Tates popularity decreases following deplatforming from social ...

Man I gotchu this once for the sake of a solid discourse. Here are some research papers showcasing that de-platforming does in fact work as a net negative for the content creator.

Klinenberg, Danny, Does Deplatforming Work? Unintended Consequences of banning far-right content creators from social media (January 27, 2022). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4019767 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4019767

Abstract from the paper:

" Social media has become an outlet for extremists to fundraise and organize on, potentially leading to deadly externalities. While governments deliberate on how to regulate this challenge, some social media companies have removed creators of offensive content deplatforming. I estimate the effects of deplatforming on revenue and viewership, using variation in the timing of removals across two video-streaming companies- YouTube, and its far-right competitor, Bitchute. I construct a novel dataset including Bitcoin wallets linking YouTube and Bitchute accounts for 79 far-right content creators, including propagandists for violent domestic extremist movements. Being deplatformed on Youtube results in a 30% increase in weekly Bitcoin revenue and a 50% increase in viewership on Bitchute. This increase in Bitchute activity accounts for about 65% of the estimated foregone revenue and 5.9% of viewership lost from YouTube, implying a negative net effect of deplatforming."

Rauchfleisch, Adrian and Kaiser, Jonas and Kaiser, Jonas, Deplatforming the Far-right: An Analysis of YouTube and BitChute (June 15, 2021). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3867818 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3867818

Abtract from the paper:

" The content moderation practice of deplatforming, i.e. the removal of undesired actors, has become common on social media platforms such as YouTube. Little research has gone into understanding the scope and impact of deplatforming. In our study, we are particularly interested in the deplatforming of far-right channels to understand the impact deplatforming has on them. To do so, we analyze two datasets: We check whether 11,198 YouTube channels have been removed in 22 months between 2018 and 2019 and for what reason. We then focus on the far-right and check whether the deplatformed far-right channels have found a new home on the alternative video platform BitChute. Our analysis shows that deplatforming is effective in minimizing the reach of disinformation and extreme speech, as alternative platforms that will allow this kind of content cannot mitigate the negative effect of being deplatformed on YouTube"

See the rest here:

This is for people who think deplatforming doesn't work