Mediaboss Marketing

How convenient that Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen just gave the social network another excuse to crack down on conservative content.

In her congressional testimony Tuesday, Haugen, a data scientist, called on Congress to enact more regulations on her former employer to combat misinformation on the platform, saying the company puts profits over public safety.

At issue for Haugen is Facebooks algorithm, which in 2018 the company changed to prioritize high-engagement content, thereby contributing according to Haugen to increased divisiveness and polarization among users. Haugen even went so far as to say that Facebooks switching off of safeguards after the 2020 election led to the Jan. 6 US Capitol riot.

Fast forward a couple months, we got the insurrection, she said in an interview with 60 Minutes on Sunday.

Whatever you think of the Capitol riot, Facebook did not cause it. The way Haugen used the word insurrection hinted of her likely progressive-lefty politics revealing her true motives. And what Haugen means by safeguards is no doubt censoring of conservative content, in a way Post readers know all too well.

Thats her main objective: censorship. She wants a complete overhaul of the content-moderation rules on Facebook, including an independent governmental body overseeing such changes. And as a good progressive, she pushes these new regulations under the guise of safety.

Facebook has demonstrated they cannot act independently, Haugen told 60 Minutes. The company over and over again chooses its profits over safety. It is subsidizing it is paying for its profits with our safety, and Im hoping that this will have a big enough impact on the world that they get the fortitude and the motivation to actually go put those regulations into place.

Like clockwork, a couple of hours after Haugens congressional testimony, Facebooks Director of Policy Communications Lena Pietsch jumped on Haugens push for more regulations.

We dont agree with her characterization of the many issues she testified about, Pietsch said in a statement. Despite all this, we agree on one thing; its time to begin to create standard rules for the Internet. Its been 25 years since the rules for the Internet have been updated, and instead of expecting the industry to make societal decisions that belong to legislators, it is time for Congress to act.

It seems like Haugen and Facebook have been on the same side this entire time. And it makes sense, as Haugen doesnt actually want to break up Facebook.

Instead, shed like the company to remain a billion-dollar monopoly imposing extreme-content regulations on its users. All while this is overseen by a federal agency created at her behest and staffed, no doubt, by former Facebook employees.

Haugen did leak some important information on Facebooks coverup of Instagrams negative effects on teen girls mental health (although who doesnt know this to be true?) and its lax treatment of drug cartels and human traffickers on its platform. But her drive for censorship wont remotely fix those issues.

Her objective is censorship. She wants Facebook and Instagram and all social-media companies, for that matter to enact safeguards to combat misinformation and hate.However, given the hyper-politicized arena and the Democrats past form for weaponizing supposedly impartial government agencies to push a progressive-elitist agenda, many will assume thismeans banning of conservative content or that which is negative to the Democratic Party.

It is one thing to propose an independent body to force Big Tech platforms to reveal the mechanics behind their algorithmicmachines of virality to spark a transparent discussion about how information is distributed and controlled. But it is far more perilous to police what is acceptable or fact. Without proper independence and rigor, it has been proven time and again that what is deemed fact and what is not merely depends on whether the person in charge wants it to be.

In this case, without once defining either misinformation, or hate, (again, the subtext was clearly right-wing content all along), Haugen opened the door for all content Silicon Valley dislikes to be banned.

If that happens, say goodbye forever to stories like The Posts expos of Hunter Bidens e-mails, which Facebook banned. Or suggestions that COVID may have originated at the Wuhan lab the theme of another squelched Post column long before the idea gained broader acceptance.

Some whistleblower, Frances Haugen. She just gave Big Tech and its progressive buddies the go-ahead to ramp up its censorship and control of the American public.

Victoria Marshall is the Collegiate Network Fellow atThe Post.

More here:
What Facebook 'whistleblower' Frances Haugen really wants: more censorship of conservative views - New York Post

By Melissa Angell (October 7, 2021, 9:55 PM EDT) -- A Florida federal judge on Wednesday granted YouTube's request to transfer former President Donald Trump's censorship lawsuit against the tech company to the Northern District of California, finding that a forum-selection clause within YouTube's terms of service is enforceable.

U.S. District Judge K. Michael Moore ruled in a 24-page order that YouTube's forum-selection clause, which requires any claims that relate to its terms of service to be governed by California law, can be enforced since Trump brought the lawsuit as a private citizen rather than in his capacity as president.

When creating a YouTube account, all users must accept an agreement...

In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know whats happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.

TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS

Read this article:
YouTube Gets Trump's Censorship Suit Transferred To Calif. - Law360

Nevada Senate candidate and Purple Heart recipient, Sam Brown, issued a stark warning to social media users during an interview on "Fox & Friends First" on Wednesday saying American voices are "at risk" after Twitter admitted it censored his account by mistake.

"This is this isn't just a warning to me," Brown stated. "This is a warning to America that all of us, all of our voices are at risk here."

GOP SENATE CANDIDATE SAM BROWN FIRES BACK AT TWITTER AS TECH GIANT ADMITS HIS ACCOUNT WAS BANNED BY MISTAKE

The Purple Heart recipient stressed the importance of civil discourse and the ability to speak freely in America through the First Amendment.

"The fact of the matter is this is not in alignment with the spirit of the First Amendment and what our country is about, which is being able to have a debate in the public domain," said Brown.

"These companies are definitely censoring some voices and others a lot more than than they should."

WHISTLEBLOWER SAYS FACEBOOK IS A US NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUE

Brown's account was permanently suspended for hours earlier this week. He filed an appeal after he realized his account had been affected. Fox News reached out to Twitter amid Brown's suspension, which was lifted less than two hours later.

"We're writing to let you know that we've unsuspended your account," Twitter told Brown in an email obtained by Fox News. "We're sorry for the inconvenience and hope to see you back on Twitter soon."

Twitter added, "A little back background: we have systems that find and remove multiple automated spam accounts in bulk, and yours was flagged as spam by mistake. Please note that it make take an hour or so for your follower and following numbers to return to normal."

"Twitter did not provide a very good explanation as to what occurred," said Brown. "They gave sort of a standard response that I was caught up in some sort of anti-spam initiative and my account was deemed to be something like a spam account, and so with no warning, no 12-hour suspension."

Twitter did not respond to Fox News' multiple requests for comment.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

"I think this is a question that America needs to ask itself is why is this occurring to conservatives?" Brown questioned.

"But beyond that, if this can happen to me, if President Trump was de-platformed completely and never to be allowed back on, what will these big tech companies like Twitter or Facebook do in the future?"

Brown said censorship is an issue he hopes to tackle if he gets elected to represent Nevada in 2022. Brown is running in the Republican primary hoping to unseat Democratic incumbent Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto.

Fox News' Joseph Wulfsohn contributed to this report.

View original post here:
Nevada Senate candidate, Purple Heart recipient blasts Twitter censorship: 'This is a warning to America' - Fox News

Stand-up comedian, actor, and writer Jim Norton will perform at the Punchline in Atlanta, tomorrow through Saturday. After a hiatus from live shows due to COVID, Nortons spicy and irreverent humor returns to the stage with new material and plenty to joke about. The comedian joined City Lights host Lois Reitzes via Zoom for a conversation covering such weighty topics as flat-Earthers, Lost, and gaining pounds in quarantine.

Interview highlights:

On committing to comedy:

It was honestly the only thing I ever wanted to do. I wanted to be a lawyer at one point, but Princeton wouldnt accept me because I had dropped out of high school. So I said, You know what? I have no education, Im driving a forklift and this is what I really want to do. I left myself no backup plan on purpose because it forced me to be a good comic, or I would have no way to make a living.

On Joan Rivers and other heroes:

I saw [Joan Rivers] at the Cutting Room here in New York She was 80 at the time, and she had note cards on the stage, on the floor, said Norton. She was a barbarian for an hour, and it was great. There was nothing off-limits Shes one of the all-time greats and she doesnt get the credits she deserves.

[Richard Pryor] was my favorite comedian of all time. I imagine if he saw my act now, he would say, Take my name out of your bio. Hed be slightly embarrassed that I love him so much, but he was the guy that made me want to do comedy.

On sensitivities and censorship in comedy:

Comedians have to deal with things through humor, but no one is telling Stephen King not to kill children in his books. No one is telling actors not to play slave-owners, not to play slashers, not to play murderers, or not to play rapists. So for people to think that comedy is harmful, when portraying someone committing a horrible act in seriousness can get you an award, I just reject the idea that comedians as performers should be limited in a way that any other form of the arts is not limited.

I think, as a performer, any subject you want to touch is absolutely acceptable; all that matters is, do you do it well, or do you do it poorly? And I think thats what you should be judged on.

Jim Norton performs stand-up at the Punchline in Atlanta on Thursday, Oct. 7, and Saturday, Oct. 9. Tickets and information are available at http://www.punchline.com/shows.

See the article here:
Comedian Jim Norton discusses censorship, flat-Earthers and his admiration for Joan Rivers | 90.1 FM WABE - WABE 90.1 FM

Have you ever been captivated by the words of a book? Lost in a world created or reflected by the mind of an author? Has a book ever challenged your ideology?

A challenged book is one that has faced a great deal of discourse or received a proposition for a ban. A banned book is one that is made unavailable in libraries or stores including public libraries, school libraries, regions and sometimes even nations.

Banned Books Week 2021 was Sept. 26 Oct. 2. According to the American Library Association, Banned Books Weekis an annual event celebrating the freedom to read.

In honor of Banned Book Week 2021, the David L. Rice Library staff created displays featuring and providing infographics on banned books.

Marna Hostetler, director of David L. Rice Library, said Banned Books Week is an opportunity for authors, librarians, publishers and book lovers to unite over a common cause the freedom to read.

The most common reason for banned books today, according to the American Library Association, is the inclusion of LGBTQ+ characters and issues, alongside religious values, sexual themes, racial issues, profanity and stories being deemed inappropriate for their intended age group.

Recently, several authors of beloved books have rightfully faced criticism for insensitive remarks. This has led to question whether or not books can stand alone from their authors, or if a book with a morally wrong perspective can be appreciated for its literature without condoning its content in the modern world.

In my opinion, there are little to no books that deserve to be banned.

There are no doubt books with vile, condemnable content but simply censoring or banning them ignores the issue rather than addresses it. We can use controversial literature to better understand the past and challenging, uncomfortable ideas without the danger of bringing them into the real world.

Because book banning is a modern issue, I reviewed eight banned books to show how literature of all types is censored like classic literature. Reasons for these bans are in accordance with the American Library Association.

The Perks of Being a Wallflower by Stephen Chbosky

Reason for ban: LGBTQ+ characters, sexual content, drug and alcohol abuse, abusiverelationships, abortion, suicidal themes, sexual abuse, bullying.

Synopsis: The Perks of Being a Wallflower is told through a series of letters written byCharlie, a high school freshman who is struggling to find his place in his school and the world. To cope with his familial issues and mental health, the aspiring writer Charlie, who aspires to be a writer, writes about the upperclassman known as wallflowers who teach him about the nature of the human mind and heart.

Despite the very emotionally troubling topics the book covers such as suicidal ideation and abuse, the book was strangely most widely banned across high schools for having a homosexual character. Its a perfect example of the dangers of censoring important issues rather than addressing them.

It is important that we have conversations about the topics in the novel rather than ignoring them. This book has been a favorite of mine for many years, and I would recommend it to anyone who knows what its like to feel out of place in the world.

And Tango Makes Three by Justin Richardson

Reasons for ban: features a same-sex penguin couple.

Synopsis: This sweet childrens book follows two penguins, Roy and Silo, who couple up anddo everything together. One day, a zookeeper notices that another penguin couple were unable to take care of their egg, and so he gives it to Silo and Roy. The egg hatches into baby Tango, and together the three become a family. The picture book is based on a true story of two male penguins from the Central Park Zoo.

Obviously as the only picture book on this list, I doubt many college students would be interested in reading it for leisure. However, this book is important to put on the radar for potential elementary education teachers who wish to include diverse, quality childrens literature in their classrooms.

The Hate U Give by Angie Thomas

Reasons for Ban: profanity, being anti-police, racial sensitivity

Synopsis: Starr lives between two worlds: the impoverished mostly black neighborhood ofGarden heights and the rich white population of her private school. Thus, Starr has two identities. Her worlds shatter when her friend is killed unjustly by a cop. Starr can no longer pretend to be somebody shes not.

The Hate U Give released in 2017 is the winner of the Coretta Scott King and Carnegie book awards. It addresses relevant issues including police brutality and racial injustice in an understandable way. It is one of the more popular young adult books addressing serious issues, and one I think everyone can benefit from reading.

To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee

Reasons for ban: racism including racial slurs, strong language, violence

Synopsis: To Kill a Mockingbird follows a young family set in the Great Depression as theylearn empathy, humanity, and how to take a stand. While their father struggles to defenda black man accused of raping a white woman, Jem and Scout are fascinated by their reclusive, mysterious neighbor.

To Kill A Mockingbird is the winner of multiple prizes including the Pulitzer and has been a staple for classic American literature for decades. It is one of the most popular fictional narratives of what life was like in the segregated United States as well as the oppressive nature of the judicial system and society towards black Americans.

The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian by Sherman Alexie

Reasons for ban: profanity, sexuality, religious conflict, political conflict, underage drinking, unsuited to age group

Synopsis: Arnold Spirit Jr. Has spent his entire life on the Spokane Indian Reservation,surrounded by the only culture and family hes ever known. Junior leaves the reservation school to follow his aspirations and desires to be a cartoonist at an all white school in a farm town. There, his efforts to fit in make an enormous impact on his peers and community.

I read this book many years ago on a whim and couldnt put it down. It is humorous and emotional all at once with characters anyone would grow to love. I personally am not familiar with many other books with a perspective on modern Native American life and feel that this book is worthy of a recommendation for that element alone. It has been in the top 5 of most challenged books for eight non-consecutive years.

Harry Potter by J.K. Rowling

Reasons for ban: negative family relationships, witchcraft, Satanism, occult, religious conflict, violence. Recently, the series was challenged in light of transphobic statements made by the author.

Synopsis: Harry Potter is a perfectly normal boy, living a miserable life with his aunt anduncle in a small respectable town in England. He has resigned himself to his aunt and uncles scorn and living in his cousins shadow forever until he is informed that he is actually a famous wizard. Potter is invited to attend a school that will allow him to learn magic.

Harry Potter has been controversial since its release in 1997 because of its depiction of a magical world. Despite the enormous protest that the book was met with, it has become a beloved part of popular culture and one of the largest franchises of its kind.

In addition, the Harry Potter series has fallen subject to modern day book burning due to the authors recent transphobic remarks. While I do not agree with supporting Rowling financially in light of her aggression towards the transgender community, the Harry Potter story lives in my heart.

George by Alex Gino

Reasons for ban: LGBTQ+ characters, LGBTQ+ themed childrens book

Synopsis: George features a fourth grade girl Melissa who was born a boy and known by thename George. Only Melissa knows of her true identity and is caught between the fear of being misunderstood and the desperation to be seen. A school play of Charlottes Web gives Melissa an idea for a plot to be seen by her school and community as the girl that she is.

This book is one of the most widely banned books in schools and has been at the top of the banned book list for several years. The writing style for George is simplistic, making it easier for younger children to understand but not so enthralling for adults. While I wouldnt recommend this book to any college peers, the story is important to share with children to allow them to understand and empathize with others or themselves.

The Tropic of Cancer by Henry Miller

Reasons for ban: sexually explicit, vulgar language.

Synopsis: The Tropic of Cancer is a dramatized autobiography of Henry Millers life. He laments the struggles of being a writer in 1900s Paris. It follows narratives of Miller, aswell as his friends and colleagues, as they seek to find a place in the world and betterunderstand their passions.

Likely the least recognizable book on this list, the Tropic of Cancer stands out on lists of banned books as it caused a large-scale court proceeding, questioning what content America can label as obscene or pornographic. As a result, American censorship laws were challenged for years thereafter.

This story is definitely a tough read due to its explicit nature and extensive use of racial and sexist slurs, but if you can overlook those elements, Tropic of Cancer may be a worthwhile read if only for its historical significance.

View post:
Banned Book Week highlights the dangers of censorship - Shield