Thursday, August 9, 2018

RT — First they came for Alex Jones… Now Facebook bans Venezuela news site

Days after the purge of Alex Jones from social media, Big Tech seems to have found another suitable target for apparent censorship. Facebook suspended the page of a prominent leftist news site writing about Venezuela.
Venezuelanalysis.com, a left-leaning news site that writes from a pro-Bolivarian revolution stance, has been around since 2003. Critics, including the US government, brand it as a propaganda outlet of the government in Caracas. The site says it is funded by donations and lists as its team Western-born journalists and filmmakers, as well as endorsements from dozens of Western intellectuals, including Noam Chomsky, Tariq Ali and Oliver Stone.
Can't challenge the narrative. Heaven forbid.

Shit storm in the forecast.

RT
First they came for Alex Jones… Now Facebook bans Venezuela news site

See also

Trending.
  • Facebook lets you deactivate or delete your account, only the latter of which is permanent.
  • This deletes all of your Facebook data from Facebook's servers, save for anonymous log files.
  • Here's how to fully delete Facebook.
CNBC — Tech Guide (4 April 2018)
How to delete everything Facebook knows about you
Todd Haselton

See also
This is censorship. There will of course be apologists for the corporate control of speech, on both the left and right, who will say, ‘It’s only censorship when the government does it!’. They are so wrong. When enormous companies that have arguably become the facilitators of public debate expel someone and his ideas because they find them morally repugnant, that is censorship. Powerful people have deprived an individual and his network of a key space in which they might propagate their beliefs. Aka censorship.
Spiked
Alex Jones and the Rise of Corporate Censorship
Brendan O'Neill | Editor

See also
Last year, representatives of Facebook, Twitter, and Google were instructed on the US Senate floor that it is their responsibility to “quell information rebellions” and adopt a “mission statement” expressing their commitment to “prevent the fomenting of discord.”
“Civil wars don’t start with gunshots, they start with words,” the representatives were told. “America’s war with itself has already begun. We all must act now on the social media battlefield to quell information rebellions that can quickly lead to violent confrontations and easily transform us into the Divided States of America.”...
In a corporatist system of government, wherein there is no meaningful separation between corporate power and state power, corporate censorship is state censorship. Because legalized bribery in the form of corporate lobbying and campaign donations has given wealthy Americans the ability to control the US government’s policy and behavior while ordinary Americans have no effective influence whatsoever, the US unquestionably has a corporatist system of government. Large, influential corporations are inseparable from the state, so their use of censorship is inseparable from state censorship.
Caitlin Johnstone — Rogue Journalist
In A Corporatist System Of Government, Corporate Censorship Is State Censorship
Caitlin Johnstone

See also
An all-out battle is raging against alternative views in the country that has positioned itself as the champion of the freedom of speech despite the fact that 90% of its media are controlled by just 6 companies. For comparison, in 1983, 90% of US media were controlled by 50 companies. Naturally, the trend negatively affects press freedom. According to the 2018 World Press Freedom Index compiled by Reporters Without Borders or RSF, the US dropped two positions compared to 2017, sliding to No. 45 overall. The role of competition has diminished while bias has become a norm. According to the 2017 Gallup/Knight Foundation Survey on Trust, Media and Democracy report, only 44 percent Americans say they can identify a news source that they believe reports the news objectively.
Strategic Culture Foundation
Alex Jones Purge: US Tech Giants Meddle into 2018 Midterm Elections 
Peter Korzun

Amazingly, the American ruling elite think that they can control the narrative by controlling the corporate media. Even the Soviet Union could not do this. See samizdat.

This assumption is moronic when over half the country is onto you.

Related

While the following article is highly relevant concerning the blowback from sanctioning Russia, and he doesn't even mention the obvious distrust of hold USD and US denominated assets involves, or the hit to soft power, the take away that is most relevant to this thread is the final sentence about the Atlantic Council, which is supervising Facebook censorship.
"Congress should focus on updating and enforcing these sanctions while incorporating new ideas from the Atlantic Council and others […]," the expert wrote.
Now "they" don't even bother about burying their tracks.

TASS
US expert warns new anti-Russian sanctions will damage American corporations

Also

The Duran
Facebook teams up with NATO to censor news (Video)

This is going dump more fuel on the incipient civil war in America, which has been "soft" so far, excepting a few incidents.

21 comments:

Konrad said...

“There will of course be apologists for the corporate control of speech, on both the left and right, who will say, ‘It’s only censorship when the government does it!’. They are so wrong.”

As Caitlin Johnstone says, big private corporations own and control the politicians and bureaucrats in the Western Empire. Therefore big private corporations are the government. Therefore private corporate censorship is state censorship.

That said, this is not a major deal for me. I’ve never been on Facebook, or visited Facebook.

When web sites like Venezuelanalysis.com are completely blocked from the Internet, I will be much more concerned.

“Amazingly, the American ruling elite think that they can control the narrative by controlling the corporate media. Even the Soviet Union could not do this. This assumption is moronic when over half the country is onto you.” ~ Tom Hickey

Elitist stupidity arises because elitists are cancer cells (or viruses). They are compelled to continue killing their host. They cannot stop, or change, or reverse course. They are hooked into everything, yet totally out of touch.

When everything in your life (everything) is based on power and profit, you are a mindless cancer cell.

Greg said...

It’s just an example of trying to appear “fair”. Ban a right wing looney, need to ban a left wing looney too

Alex Jones should have been banned by anyone who has a shred of decency. The man has filed lawsuits against people who lost 5 year olds in a school shooting. I’d fucking kick him in the nuts if I could get close enough.

Tom Hickey said...

Ban a right wing looney, need to ban a left wing looney too

That's how the control game works.

Start with "loonies" and then move closer and closer to the center until there is only a single side and it is the narrative dictated by the ruling elite.

The Danger of a Single Story

Ryan Harris said...

Sometimes Infowars Paul Watson can be amusing. Their website traffic and app installs have soared as people used the publicity to check out Infowars.

Some of Alex Jones stuff is crazy but as I get old, I appreciate "crazy" non mainstream thinking people more and more They expand the size of the overton window.

Calgacus said...

Start with "loonies" and then move closer and closer to the center until there is only a single side and it is the narrative dictated by the ruling elite.

Yes, and it shows how right-wing this censorship is, as usual, for Venezuelanalysis is not looney at all. So the "center" converged to, the "single side" looks like Mussolini's fascism.

Andrew Anderson said...

The Danger of a Single Story Tom Hickey

As is often the case, the Bible said it long ago:

The first to plead his case seems right, until another comes and examines him. Proverbs 18:17

Greg said...

Jones goes way over the line though. Suing people who had children murdered to pursue a political agenda?

If we can’t all agree that’s over the line we are screwed , we are beyond hope. He even resorts to the I was just kidding line when pressed

KIDDING!! That’s why you filed suits against these parents?

Matt Franko said...

“The first to plead his case seems right, until another comes and examines him.”

What if he first is telling the truth?

All this is doing is identifying a danger of a the dialectic method...

Matt Franko said...

And PS nobody cares about shithole Venezuela anyway...

Andrew Anderson said...

What if he first is telling the truth? Franko

“A single witness shall not rise up against a man on account of any iniquity or any sin which he has committed; on the evidence of two or three witnesses a matter shall be confirmed." Deuteronomy 19:15 NASB [bold added]

Tom Hickey said...

The proper way is to have a policy that is made public, e.g., a published list of conditions sufficient to get a post taken down and a set of conditions that will result in temporary suspension of an account or permanent banning.

Selective "policy" amounts to censorship.

Here at MNE we have a policy of taking down commercial spam.

In the case of trolling, the party would be warned, but so far that hasn't happened yet that I can recall. although I might have said that some behavior his getting mighty close to it.

There is also a policy of taking down egregiously offensive posts but that hasn't happened yet either, although some have requested that certain people be banned and others that were regular commentators in the past have stopped commenting, some owing to disgust or frustration.

I regard taking stuff down because some people don't like it as censorship. Same with public policy in penalizing or outlawing certain behavior that some people find offensive.

Hey, what can a libertarian do and still claim to be for personal freedom, constitutional liberties and civil and human rights.

Ralph Musgrave said...

I've been banned from Twitter (permanently I think). My message to anyone else hereabouts who has not been banned from Facebook or Twitter is: you aren't being controversial enough - shame on you....:-)

Matt Franko said...

Ralph you are a wild man...

Matt Franko said...

From an MMT perspective no one should be weeping for Alex Jones ... it added a bunch of noise to the situation and they are all libertarian gold bugs over there... F them ....

Matt Franko said...

AA, you’re response misses my point completely...

The proverb is only talking about 2 people in adverse position...

Tom Hickey said...

It's not about Alex Jones.

Matt Franko said...

Hopefully it’s about muzzling all the libertarians then??????

Tom Hickey said...

Hopefully it’s about muzzling all the libertarians then??????

Whatever. It's just going to increase interest in AJ.

Bob said...

My policy is to censor my time.

Tom Hickey said...

My policy is to censor my time.

And it is now being pointed out that allocation of time and attention is up to individual choice. No Big Daddy or Mommy needed.

This is especially true on social media, which are highly selective, and where one can also request that similar materials not be shown on one's feed.

Bob said...

Feeds have not worked for me. I must be too choosy.