Mediaboss Marketing

Meghan Daum is the author of The Problem with Everything: My Journey Through the New Culture Wars, in which she examines her own cognitive dissonance as a liberal and a feminist, and her feeling of alienation in todays cultural climate. She and Bridget discuss how society has changed dramatically in the last 10 years, the gulf between Gen X and Millennials, coming of age in a culture where theres a conversational chokehold happening and what the effects might be, and the death of cultural gatekeepers. They dive into the minefield of being writers in the age of social media when a provocative piece can get you cancelled, reminisce about growing up reaping the benefits of the feminist movement that came before them, explore why learning to stick up yourself is such an important skill for a woman to have, and wonder what happened to the life isnt fair philosophy that they were raised with. Its a fascinating conversation between two women on the front lines of the culture war who still believe that nuance is something that should not be vilified.

Subscribe to Walk-Ins Welcome w/ Bridget Phetasy in Apple Podcasts (and leave a 5-star review, please!), or by RSS feed. For all our podcasts in one place, subscribe to the Ricochet Audio Network Superfeed in Apple Podcasts or by RSS feed.

See more here:
Meghan Daum Believes We Have Lost the Ability to Sustain Complex Arguments - Ricochet.com

Netflix has recently published its annual Environmental, Social and Governance Report, documenting all the occasions when it has censored content on its streaming platform due to government requests.

According to the document, the streaming giant has taken down content on a governments request just nine times, all of which have been made over the past five years. Singapore tops the list, removing a total of five items, including The Last Temptation of Christ a title completely banned in the country a Brazilian comedy calledThe Last Hangover, and three cannabis-related shows, as weed is illegal in the Asian country. New Zealand had NetflixremoveThe Bridge, which the government considers objectionable, while Vietnam pulledFull Metal Jacket and Germany bannedNight of the Living Dead. Finally, Saudi Arabia had Netflix remove an episode of Patriot Act with Hasan Minhaj after it criticized the Middle Eastern state, which made international headlines.

Despite having taken the aforementioned content down in its respective countries, Netflix reassures that it doesnt take these censorship demands lightly, saying that it will only do so if the company receives a written government request and cannot, in any circumstance, reach an agreement with local authorities. Where it deems necessary, the streaming service will also actively fight against those demands, as in the case of Brazil withThe First Temptation of Christ, which depicts Jesus as a gay man in a religious satire. Netflix had taken the issue to court, ultimately winning the case in the countrys Supreme Court last month.

In other entertainment news, check out the freshly-releasedThe Invisible Man trailer now.

Read more from the original source:
Netflix Reveals All Its Government Censorship Incidents Over the Last 5 Years - HYPEBEAST

February 10, 2020 (American Thinker) One of the most worrisome things in America today is that the public square isn't public. Instead, it's owned by tech oligarchs, all of whom hew left politically. For years, Google (and its subsidiary YouTube), Twitter, and Facebook have systematically shut down conservative speech while giving almost unlimited passes to speech coming from the Left.

Twitter has been especially fierce in silencing conservatives, but Facebook has had its moment. Of late,privateFacebook groups are finding their posts censored, even though they're being shared only among members of like-minded communities. Facebook also has a revolting habit of appending to certain links that it doesn't like claims that the link could be false and directing people instead to "reputable" sources such as theNew York Times,the Washington Post,the AP, orReuters.

For this reason, it's noteworthy when social media outletsallowa popular conservative video to remain on their sites. In this case, the video was a re-cut showing highlights from Trump's State of the Union speech, intercut with endlessly repeated footage of a vindictive, petty Pelosi ripping that same speech.

Those who opposed the video, which has been viewed millions of times, claimed that it's a "manipulated video," which violates Facebook's current rules and Twitter's upcoming rules. Both outlets, however,rejected that viewpoint and rightly too. The concept of a dangerously manipulated video arises in the context of "deep fakes" that is, videos so subtly manipulated that people do not realize that the video has been altered.

In this case, it's clear even to the meanest intelligence that the video has been altered to make a point (a good point):

Kevin Jackson made a similar, equally good video:

Sooner or later (with sooner being better), Trump is going to have to address the way in which the social media giants systematically suppress conservative speech. In an ideal world, competition would create competitive sites. However, it's been years now, and none of the competitive attempts have taken off.

The unique status of the tech giants makes them very difficult to challenge in the free market. In many ways, they have become the internet equivalent of the restaurants and hotels that the Civil Rights Act addressed when it passed legislation overriding private property rights and holding that people who own places of "public accommodation" cannot discriminate. Given social media's extraordinary reach and control over communications among members of the public, it's dangerous to allow these tech sites to hold such unlimited power over the content of speech in America.

Published with permission from the American Thinker.

Visit link:
Conservatives shocked as Facebook, Twitter refuse to censor pro-Trump video - Lifesite

The coronavirus is the greatest crisis to have faced President Xi Jinping since he took power in 2012.

Since the outbreak began in the central city of Wuhan last December, it has killed 565 people and infected more than 28,200. All but two of the deaths were in mainland China. It has forced the government to lock down cities with a population exceeding 60 million and is likely to cut GDP growth this year by at least 0.5 percentage points.

Who is responsible for this catastrophe? Beijing cannot blame it on the United States and the hostile foreign forces it holds responsible for eight months of protest in Hong Kong and helping Tsai Ying-wen to win a second presidential term in Taiwan. No the guilty parties are within China.A bitter war is being waged on the Chinese internet over this issue.

Many believe the government is guilty of a cover-up after the first patient in Wuhan experienced the symptoms of the disease on December 1. On the social platform Douban, many people have written reviews of the television series Chernobyl, about the Soviet nuclear disaster in April 1986. The Soviet government delayed news of the catastrophe and did not report faithfully what had happened. In any era, any country, its the same. Cover everything up, wrote one blogger. That is socialism.

On December 30, Li Wenliang (pictured), a Wuhan doctor, informed fellow doctors in an online chat group that seven patients from a local seafood market had been diagnosed with a SARS-like illness and were quarantined in his hospital. Contaminated animals in the market are the most likely source of the virus.

Li and seven other doctors were visited by city police; they accused them of rumour-mongering and warned them not to discuss the disease in public. Li himself was tested positive for the virus on February 1 and died in the early hours of February 7.

His death caused an outpouring of grief and anger on social media. Wuhan government owes Dr Li Wenliang an apology, said one. We want freedom of speech, said another. Tens of thousands read the comments before the censors deleted them.

If any of us here is fortunate enough to speak up for the public in the future, please make sure you remember tonights anger, said another comment.

Lis death is the most tragic result of a cover-up. On January 2, hospitals in Wuhan accepted 27 patients who had direct exposure to the seafood market. By January 18, the number of infected patients in Wuhan had risen to 62; that day the city government arranged a public banquet with 40,000 families making and sharing food. By then doctors had told the city government that the virus could be spread from human to human.

But it was only on January 22 that the city was quarantined and severe measures put in place. In the weeks before, five million people had left Wuhan to travel all over China and around the world. It is they who have carried the disease across the globe.

Chinese are asking why it took seven weeks from the first case to the public announcement and imposition of drastic measures. The answer is Chinas highly centralised reporting system. The Wuhan government is likely to have reported details of the disease to Beijing; but it could not announce anything or take strong measures without approval.

Was it only Xi himself who could make such a major decision? Did the Prime Minister and Minister of Health have to wait for him?

Many of the bloggers direct their anger at Wuhan Mayor Zhou Xianwang and Hubei governor Wang Xiaodong. During an interview that Zhou gave to state television, one commentor wrote in a live stream: Stop talking. We just want to know when you will resign.

To avoid the censors, bloggers must be ingenious. Some refer to Xi Jinping as Trump. Others describe the police and police stations with characters that are incorrect but have the same sound as the correct ones. This works because most of the censoring is done by computers, which cannot detect wordplay.

In the early days of the crisis, control of the Internet was eased, allowing criticism of the local government. Then this week President Xi said that the government needed to step up propaganda and strengthen online media control to maintain social stability. Many WeChat accounts have been shut down. State news media runs positive stories about how China is defeating the virus and about health workers in the front line.

This epidemic is devastating and figures at the very top of government are implicated in the appalling response. The Chernobyl catastrophe was so horrific that it helped to speed the collapse of the Soviet Union. The question now is what the consequences will be for the Chinese government of this terrible, growing crisis that it has handled so incompetently.

Follow this link:
Censorship, lies and death: China's government under fire - TheArticle

DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) The Iowa Democratic Party released partial results of its kickoff presidential caucus after a daylong delay late Tuesday showing former Midwestern mayor Pete Buttigieg with a slight lead over progressive Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders in the opening contest of the partys 2020 primary season.

The results followed 24 hours of chaos as technical problems marred the complicated caucus process, forcing state officials to apologize and raising questions about Iowas traditional place atop the presidential primary calendar.

It was too early to call a winner based on the initial results, but Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, former Vice President Joe Biden and Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar were trailing in the tally of State Delegate Equivalents, according to data released for the first time by the Iowa Democratic Party nearly 24 hours after voting concluded.

The results reflected 71% of precincts in the state.

The two early leaders, Buttigieg and Sanders, were separated by 40 years in age, conflicting ideology and more.

Sanders, a 78-year-old self-described democratic socialist, has been a progressive powerhouse for decades, while the 38-year-old Buttigiegs early standing cemented his transformation from a little-known Indiana mayor to a legitimate force in the 2020 contest. Buttigieg is also the first openly gay candidate to earn presidential primary delegates.

We dont know all of the numbers, but we know this much: A campaign that started a year ago with four staff members, no name recognition, no money, just a big idea a campaign that some said should have no business even making this attempt has taken its place at the front of this race, Buttigieg, declared, his voice filled with emotion, as he campaigned in next-up New Hampshire with his husband looking on.

Buttigiegs early rise was rivaled for possible importance by the struggle of another moderate, Biden.

One of his partys most accomplished figures, the former two-term vice president and longtime senator was mired in the second tier of Iowa candidates with almost two-thirds of precincts reporting. Bidens campaign sought to downplay the caucus results even before they were released, hardly a measure of strength for a high-profile contender who has led national polls for most of the last year.

We believe we will emerge with the delegates we need to continue on our path to nomination, said Symone Sanders, a senior adviser.

While all campaigns were eager to spin the Iowa results to their advantage, there was little immediate indication that the incomplete results erased the confusion and concern that loomed over the caucuses. It was unclear when the full results would be released.

During a private conference call with campaigns earlier in the day, state state party chairman Troy Price declined to answer pointed questions about the timeline -- even whether it would be days or weeks.

We have been working day and night to make sure these results are accurate, Price said at a subsequent press conference.

The leading candidates pressed on in New Hampshire, which votes in just seven days. And billionaire Democrat Michael Bloomberg sensed opportunity, saying he would double his already massive advertising campaign and expand his sprawling staff focused on a series of delegate-rich states voting next month.

The partys caucus crisis was an embarrassing twist after months of promoting Iowa as a chance for Democrats to find some clarity in a jumbled field. Instead, after a buildup that featured seven rounds of debates, nearly $1 billion spent nationwide and a year of political jockeying, caucus day ended with no winner, no official results and many fresh questions about whether Iowa can retain its coveted first status.

Iowa marked the first contest in a primary season that will span all 50 states and several U.S. territories, ending at the partys national convention in July.

Before he left Iowa late Monday, Sanders said, Today marks the beginning of the end for Donald Trump.

Facing New Hampshire voters a day later, Sanders said thank you to Iowa and, tongue in cheek, expressed confidence that New Hampshire election officials would have more success counting votes.

And when you count those votes, I look forward to winning here, he said.

For the first time, the Iowa Democratic Party reported three sets of results this year: a tally of caucusgoers initial candidate preference; vote totals from the final alignment after supporters of lower-ranking candidates were able to make a second choice, and the total number of State Delegate Equivalents each candidate received.

The Associated Press will declare a winner based on the number of state delegates each candidate wins, which has been the traditional standard.

Sen. Amy Klobuchar, who represents Iowa neighbor Minnesota, was also in the early running, while outsider candidates including entrepreneur Andrew Yang, billionaire activist Tom Steyer and Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard lagged behind.

Campaigning in New Hampshire on Tuesday, Warren also said she was feeling good about her performance in Iowa.

The state party told campaigns Tuesday the problem was a result of a coding issue in the reporting system that it said had since been fixed. It said it had verified the accuracy of the collected data and said the problem was not a result of a hack or an intrusion.

A Biden campaign representative objected to the partys plan to release partial results before checking them against paper records, saying in the conference call that the plan didnt address growing reports about problems on caucus night, such as precinct captains unable to get through on the phone to report results.

Sanders adviser Jeff Weaver thanked party officials, and encouraged other campaigns not to undermine the party.

Folks who are just trying to delay the return of this because of their relative positioning in the results last night, I think thats a bit disingenuous, Weaver said.

Bloomberg announced plans to double his national television advertising spending which has already exceeded $100 million as he expands his paid staff to more than 2,000 people.

Bloomberg is looking to next month, having decided to bypass Iowas contest and the three other states voting this month in favor of the delegate-rich states in March.

After more than a year of this primary, the field is as unsettled as ever, Bloomberg spokeswoman Sabrina Singh said. No one has made the sale or even come close to it.

Beyond 2020, Mondays debacle invited fresh criticism about Iowa caucuses, a complicated set of political meetings staged in a state that is whiter and older than the Democratic Party in general. Many questioned anew whether it was a quaint political tradition whose time had passed.

I think Iowa is a dumpster fire, said Dick Harpootlian, a South Carolina state senator and longtime Biden supporter, who served as an Iowa precinct captain for Biden on Monday.

___

Catch up on the 2020 election campaign with AP experts on our weekly politics podcast, Ground Game.

View original post here:
Buttigieg slightly leading Sanders in partial Iowa results - The Associated Press