ArchiveArchive

Snopes, which will be “fact-checking” for Facebook, employs leftists almost exclusively

December 20, 2016 by Natural News Editors Leave a Comment

Snopes, which will now have the power to declare what news is or is not legitimate on the world’s largest online platform, almost exclusively employs leftists.

(Article by Alex Pfeiffer and Peter Hasson, republished from DailyCaller.com)

Facebook announced Thursday that mythbusting website Snopes will be one of a few fact-checking organizations allowed to label stories as “fake news.”

Almost all of the writers churning out fact checks for Snopes have a liberal background, and many of them have expressed contempt for Republican voters. The Daily Caller could not identify a single Snopes fact-checker who comes from a conservative background. Snopes did not respond to a list of questions from TheDC regarding the site’s ideological leaning.

At least two of the site’s fact-checkers joined Snopes after writing for Raw Story, a far-left publication that describes itself as a “progressive news site that focuses on stories often ignored in the mainstream media.” Several others have demonstrated liberal partisanship.

Snopes managing editor Brooke Binkowski said on Twitter that Brexit supporters were “pandering to racist mouth-breather ‘Britain First’ types.”

Snopes fact-checker Arturo Garcia is an editor-at-large for Raw Story. Garcia is also a managing editor of Racialicious, a pro-Black Lives Matter blog. One of Garcia’s most recent stories at Raw Story was titled “The next time your right-wing uncle tries to ruin the holidays with ‘proof’ of creationism, show him these videos.”

Back when Trump was reportedly considering launching his own media network, Garcia implied that it would be a TV channel for white people, calling it “White Entertainment Television.”

After Boston University professor Saida Grundy was criticized for racist tweets in which she called white, college-aged males a “problem population,” Palmo Markus suggested Grundy’s tweets weren’t actually racist because they were directed at white people.

Facebook routinely buried conservative news and topics from trending on the site and artificially made liberal topics part of the national discussion, former Facebook employees admitted last May. TheDC previously reported that the former Facebook trending news team was filled by liberals. It has since automated the Trending Topics section of its page.

Facebook announced Thursday it will use fact-checking organizations that have signed the Poynter Institute’s International Fact Checking Code of Principles. The Associated Press reports that Facebook is currently working with Snopes, ABC News, Factcheck.org and PolitiFact, and that the list could grow.

German government’s fear of ‘hate speech’ leading to full-throttle censorship on Facebook

December 5, 2016 by Mary Wilder Leave a Comment

To members of the Regressive Left, free speech really means freedom from seeing or hearing anything that upsets or offends them. They only want their opinions to be heard and for everyone else to be silenced.

In reality, however, free speech means that everyone should be allowed to express whatever opinion they choose, regardless of how disgusting it may be. Evil people have just as much right to state their opinions as the kindest people on earth.

That’s what liberty is.

We allow people to express themselves regardless of what that entails. Unfortunately, not everyone abides by that belief, especially in Germany, where some now want Facebook to be held responsible for the kind of content that their users are posting. The German government is now demanding that Facebook remove pro-Nazi rhetoric from its site, claiming that it is against the law to allow such content to be published.

James Rothwell of The Telegraph writes, “Under German law, Facebook is legally obliged to remove racist or Nazi-themed content as soon as it becomes aware of it. However, Facebook has dismissed the allegations, saying they ‘lack merit,’ and insists that none of its employees have broken any laws. The country’s government has already threatened to hit social media websites such as Facebook and Twitter with hefty fines if they fail to delete racist content.”

While we can all agree that people posting pro-Nazi ideals are despicable and deserve to be treated like the human garbage that they are, Facebook is still a private company that reserves the right to choose what kind of content it desires to have posted on its website. The second the government begins to interfere in the business practices of private citizens is the second we should all get worried. They have no right to do this, and it’s dangerous for them to believe that they can.

One of the biggest issues facing the world today is the infringement of free speech and the pressure put on social networks to police negative comments and what is perceived to be hate speech. While comments related to actual Nazism certainly qualify as being just that, the leftists have destroyed their legitimacy by claiming that innocuous comments are also “hate speech.” There needs to be a firm distinction between the two, and the overreaction by the Left isn’t helping anyone.

So, should Facebook remove content promoting Nazism? Yes. Should the government be involved in any way, shape or form? No. Not at all. Never.

Sources:

TechDirt.com

Telegraph.co.uk

Reuters.com

The censorship of anti-Hillary: Email leaks show Hillary’s ties with Google and Facebook

November 2, 2016 by Don Wrightman Leave a Comment

Many citizens across the United States are increasingly waking up to the fact that they are being manipulated not just through the mainstream media, but also social networks and search engines. The current trend seems to be showing a conspiracy by these groups working together to assist in helping to elect Hillary Clinton.

Six months prior to Clinton’s announcement that she would be running for President of the United States, there were discreet email conversations taking place between her current campaign management and companies such as Facebook, Apple and Google. These companies have all been working directly with Hillary’s campaign since it’s inception.

Digital strategist for the Clinton campaign Teddy Goff wrote a memo to Clinton that was exposed on Wikileaks. The memo includes the importance of the campaign forming “working relationships” with the likes of Google, Apple, Facebook, and other technology companies. “We have begun having discreet conversations with some of these companies to get a sense of their priorities for the coming cycle, but would encourage you, as soon as your technology leadership is in place, to initiate more formal discussions,” he wrote.

Google’s Eric Schmidt was also addressed in the memo and identified as having a team assembled and hard at work. Although that team wasn’t addressed by name, Schmidt funds a tech startup called The Groundwork which is on the Hillary campaign’s payroll. There’s no denying the well documented working relationship between Hillary and the media. We all know that she has purchased the best marketing plan available for her campaign and it shows when we turn on the television and surf the web.

Media is a very powerful tool. There’s good reason why companies buy online ad space, film commercials, sponsor events, etc. Hillary is trying to win with the media. Media bias can easily push a voter off the fence and the Clinton campaign has been working to have it instilled upon startup. If the best marketing scheme secures the election — the party is over. It is not a secret that Hillary controls the mainstream media, it’s a strategy.

Sources:

FreeBeacon.com

Breitbart.com

Making a statement? ‘Somewhat libertarian’ Elon Musk just blew up Facebook’s $150M ‘spy satellite’

September 1, 2016 by Mary Wilder Leave a Comment

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg just can’t avoid having a negative perception in the public light. Whether it be as a result of censoring conservative trending topics, claiming that Facebook isn’t a media company, or engaging in otherwise shady business practices, Zuckerberg definitely isn’t the most likable guy on the planet.

Now things have gotten even worse for Zuckerberg as he appears to have made an enemy of billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk — the founder of PayPal and Tesla — considering that Musk’s company SpaceX just blew up Facebook’s $150 million “space satellite.” Literally.

As reported by Guy Birchall of The Sun, “NASA says SpaceX was conducting a test firing of its pioneering unmanned rocket when disaster struck. A series of explosions sent smoke and flames shooting through the sky and shook buildings miles away.”

In the destruction, Facebook’s first satellite — which was going to be used for spying under the guise of “internet freedom” — was completely destroyed, leaving many to wonder if this was Musk’s way of sending a message.

Could this have been completely intentional? Given that Musk’s political ideology seems to differ substantially from Zuckerberg’s, there’s no reason to rule it out. When people of this stature begin to have disputes, things have a tendency to get extremely messy. It’s extremely possible that this was all Musk’s way of telling Zuckerberg to stop using his company to spy on people.

See, Zuckerberg has a long history of using Facebook in order to spy on its users. It’s even reached the point where he’s openly admitting that the company spies in order to gain private information that they then sell to advertisers. It’s no longer a conspiracy theory — this is a stone-cold fact. The fact that there isn’t more of an outrage about this is a testament to just how brainwashed the general public has become.

If Musk is trying to send a message that this kind of behavior is unacceptable, then good for him. If only the rest of the billionaire entrepreneurs in the world felt the same way about liberty and freedom then we likely wouldn’t be in many of the societal messes that we currently are. Unfortunately, not much seems to be changing on that end, as the 2016 election year is currently proving.

Only one thing seems certain at this time: we’re far safer with more Elon Musks and less Mark Zuckerbergs — even if only us libertarians are aware of it.

Sources:

TheSun.co.uk

LATimes.com

Victims’ families hit Facebook with a $1BILLION lawsuit for abetting Hamas terrorism

July 14, 2016 by D. Samuelson Leave a Comment

The current $1 billion dollar lawsuit against Facebook is for “providing a platform for [Hamas] militants to spread incitement and violence,” and this lawsuit isn’t the first. Facebook received similar charges in 2015, after a sharp increase of deadly Palestinian terrorist attacks in Israel and the West Bank. At that time, as reported by The Epoch Times, the Israel Law Center represented 20,000 individuals and filed a class action lawsuit against Facebook for being “complicit in the attacks.”

Using algorithms to connect terrorists and sympathizers

The premise used by the Israel Law Center was that Facebook didn’t just publish information based on free speech. They claimed that Facebook didn’t effectively monitor its content, and it flat out used “its algorithms connect the terrorists to the inciters,” just like Facebook does connecting anyone with just about anybody, while they keep track of just about everybody. No word yet on the outcome of the 2015 class action lawsuit, although Facebook did remove some of the more incendiary Hamas pages from their site shortly after that lawsuit was initiated.

Does the U.S. Anti-Terrorism Act trump free speech? Should it?

This new billion dollar lawsuit, according to Bloomberg.com, was made on the behalf of five families, four American and one Israeli, who all lost relatives in random terrorist attacks. One victim, as reported by the Jerusalem Post, was three year old Chaya Braun, who was in her stroller when she was intentionally run over by a Palestinian driver. Another was Taylor Force, a 28 year-young American military veteran, who was stabbed to death by a Palestinian while vacationing in Israel. The lawsuit representing these individuals and three other families was filed in the United States utilizing statures of the U.S. Anti-Terrorism Act. As per The Seattle Times, prosecutors claim that Facebook’s platform gives assistance to the Palestinian group Hamas by helping them raise money and share instruction in “recruiting, radicalizing . . . creating fear and carrying out attacks.” Hamas has been considered a terrorist organization in the U.S. since 1997.

Who determines where free speech ends?

Facebook has it’s own method for controlling unquestionable content called Community Standards. Here they discuss their rationale to allow “witness type” footage as in the recent murder of Philando Castile; Facebook also claims to not allow any video from a group or individual who is “celebrating the shooting.” Yet it is precisely this type of Hamas celebratory video that the lawsuits are claiming have not been restricted. If the provisions of the U.S. Anti Terrorist Act are not accepted as applicable, under other U.S. law, internet companies are not generally liable with regards to their content. Does this ring a familiar bell, like those pharmaceutical companies not being responsible for what they put in their vaccine syringes?

And what about those purposely placed Facebook Trends?

It will take time for these lawsuits to wind their way through the halls of justice and the courts of public opinion. It’s an interesting side note that while Facebook is being called out for abetting and aiding terrorist groups, former employees have blown the whistle on practices undertaken when another social movement, the Black Lives Matter, was just beginning. Stories about the then fledging group were being “manually inserted” by Facebook employees so Black Lives Matter would gain popularity and trend higher. The Daily Caller reports that there is some question about the true organic growth of the Black Lives Matter movement vs. what agenda Facebook had it making it a top social engineering trend. Who is Zuckerberg really working for?

Rather then rely on Facebook news feeds, why not put stock in organic seeds?

Sources:

Science.NaturalNews.com

DailyCaller.com

(Photo credit: pixabay.com)