Katherine Frisk note: Islamic State extremism has now given Google, Face Book and You Tube the excuse that they need to block out all dissenting voices. Voices that do not post violent material chopping people’s heads off, or even hard-core sadomasochistic pornography, but dissenting voices who contradict the narrative that is being played out in the Main Stream Media.
The weapon that they are using is to demonitize any sites that speak out on health, environment, social, political and economic issues. Many sites that have been doing so over the last seven years have already felt the effects of this censorship and are experiencing lost revenues which no doubt Google et al hopes will put them out of business. As a result in the last three months these sites have had to resort to asking their followers for donations in order to survive. The situation is dire and threatens not only free speech but truthful, honest and accurate reporting as opposed to tabloid propaganda.
a. Health – the dangers of genetically modified foods and vaccines that cause autism. Narcotics trafficking around the globe often facilitated by “intelligence services” and shipped out through military bases.
b. Environment – chemtrails, situations similar to the Dakota pipeline and the dangers of rising radiation in nuclear power stations across the USA. Along with sites that investigate and expose geo-engineering and weather modification around the globe for the purposes of political warfare. The “Climate change” hoax and the theft of tax revenue through imposed international carbon tax.
c. Social – exposing the people behind “color revolutions,”regime change and social engineering and how these mechanisms work. As well as the rampant pedophilia, sex trafficking and organ harvesting the people involved who fill of positions of power in governments, banking and corporations. The fact is that the world is ruled by “elite”pedophiles and satanists.
d. Political– Grexit, Brexit, the Le Pen campaign and the Trump campaign were and still are largely driven by Independent Media and social media platforms while Main Stream blocks out their voices. This censorship will block them out altogether in order to steer society into the political consensus that they desire. In other words, silence the “deplorables.” 9/11 inside job and the many other false flag events used to engineer civil wars and excuses for wars against other countries. This will also include silencing people like Wikileaks and Edward Snowden and anyone who writes or shares their information.
e. Economic – all sites that expose how the world’s economy really works, not how they want us to believe that it works. This includes engineered market crashes, precious metals price rigging, currency manipulation, Libor interest rate manipulation and the falacy of the fiat money Federal reserve system. Unaccounted for tax revenues such as the trillions missing out of the Pentagon and the bankruptcy not only of the EU but of the USA and how they intend you to pay for it.
The world is about to be put into a vice grip of Orwellian design.
from Zero Hedge:
The issue of filtering out content that advocates or glorifies terrorism on widely-used media sites like Alphabet’s YouTube has come under renewed scrutiny since authorities learned that 23-year-old Salman Abedi was radicalized after watching videos of an American preacher posted on the site. So unsurprisingly, barely two weeks after UK Prime Minister Theresa May accused tech companies of providing a “safe space” for extremist content, Google’s General Counsel Kent Walker has revealed four new measures the company is taking to censor its users.
These videos will now come with a warning, be banned from featuring adds or collecting advertising revenue, or be recommended, endorsed, or commented on. Users will still be able to find the content once the policy goes into effect, but it will eliminate one of the most prominent means of transmission – sharing over social media networks like Twitter and the messaging app Telegram.
“…we will be taking a tougher stance on videos that do not clearly violate our policies — for example, videos that contain inflammatory religious or supremacist content. In future these will appear behind an interstitial warning and they will not be monetised, recommended or eligible for comments or user endorsements. That means these videos will have less engagement and be harder to find. We think this strikes the right balance between free expression and access to information without promoting extremely offensive viewpoints.”
As noted by NYT, figuring out how to censor extremist content while taking precautions not to trod too heavily on free speech has been a longstanding problem for YouTube.
“Google has created a thriving video platform that appeals to people with a wide range of interests. But it has also become a magnet for extremist groups that can reach a wide audience for their racist or intolerant views. Google has long wrestled with how to curb that type of content while not inhibiting the freedom that makes YouTube popular.”
The company also said it will launch a new social-intervention program that relies on the “power of targeted online advertising” to reach out to impressionable terrorist recruits, and redirect them toward anti-terrorist content.
In addition to devoting more engineering resources to technology that automatically filters out questionable content, the company said it would also add more manpower to its “trusted flagger” program, though it neglected to explain what qualifies someone as a “trusted flagger” (from what we can tell the program involves partnerships with select NGOs).
While we recognize the political pressure that the company is under to seem like it’s doing something about terorrism, we hope YouTube doesn’t repeat its mistakes from September 2016, when it sparked a backlash after deeming posts by YouTube personality Philip DeFranco to be “inappropriate for advertising,” offering only a vague explanation as to why.
Perhaps the company could offer to hire people from a truly diverse range of backgrounds and political persuasions to try and prevent a repeat of this incident. Though given the state of today’s discourse – where leftists accuse anyone who disagrees with them of being a hateful racist – we worry that relying at all on human judgment could be a mistake.
Especially if these flaggers are academics. Because the political climate on US college campuses, as students at Evergreen State in Olympia, Wash. recently demonstrated, is grossly intolerant of viewpoints that don’t jive with their ultraprogressive orthodoxies.