Doc7505
Diamond Member
- Feb 16, 2016
- 15,707
- 27,651
- 2,430
Would Social Media Have Censored Video Of 9/11 Or The Kennedy Assassination?
Would Social Media Have Censored Video Of 9/11 Or The Kennedy Assassination?
By Thomas L. Knapp via the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism
According to CNN Business, “Facebook, YouTube and Twitter struggle to deal with New Zealand shooting video.”
“Deal with” is code for “censor on demand by governments and activist organizations who oppose public access to information that hasn’t first been thoroughly vetted for conformity to their preferred narrative.”
Do you really need to see first-person video footage of an attacker murdering 49 worshipers at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand?
Maybe not. Chances are pretty good you didn’t even want to. I suspect that many of us who did (I viewed what appeared to be a partial copy before YouTube deleted it) would rather we could un-see it.... But whether or not we watch it should be up to us, not those governments and activists. Social media companies should enable our choices, not suppress our choices at the censors’ every whim.... If Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube had been primary news sources in 1915, would they have permitted us to view footage (rare, as film was in its early days) of New Zealanders’ desperate fight at Gallipoli? How about the attack on Pearl Harbor? The assassination of president John F. Kennedy? The second plane hitting the World Trade Center?
Lucinda Creighton of the Counter Extremism Project complains to CNN that the big social media firms aren’t really “cooperating and acting in the best interest of citizens to remove this content.”
~~~~~~
n Australia/New Zealand the social mob lynching's of anybody who previously spoke about concerns over Islam / mass migration has begun. There is an outpouring of hate right now against anyone who raised a problem with mass migration at all. That view is now radioactive, toxic and cannot be held in public. Nobody can now criticize Islam in any way in Australia/NZ because this horrific attack has given true victim status to Muslims. Anyone who criticizes Islam in any way in Australia/NZ now will have eggs thrown at them, will lose their job, their friends, be isolated because this attack has publicly confirmed to everyone that Muslims are the victims of terrible prejudice in the West.
So now you see that violence was never the solution to the actual problems in fact it has made them worse. Now we will really be crushed with the full force of the authoritarian state, and the outsourced mob vengeance.
An elite group of individuals cannot centralize and control the masses without censorship. Henceforth, freedom of speech and “freedom of press” was built into the great experiment of 1776. However today no place on earth enjoys such freedom ironically this age of highest speed of communication. Sad situation. This is becoming worse than Russia and China!!!
The deep state is going to go after the Right now, now matter what. So quit hiding under a blanket, if not this attack, then any other pretext will be created used to demonize the Right anyway.
How Woodrow Wilson’s Propaganda Machine Changed American
How Woodrow Wilson’s Propaganda Machine Changed American Journalism | History | Smithsonian
When the United States declared war on Germany 100 years ago, the impact on the news business was swift and dramatic. In its crusade to “make the world safe for democracy,” the Wilson ...
~~~~~~~~~~~~
THE WAR . At Home . Communication . News & Censorship
THE WAR . At Home . Communication . News & Censorship | PBS
During World War II most Americans followed the news of the war through three sources: radio broadcasts, newspapers – there were more than 11,000 in the country then – and newsreels that ... Government control of the news was comprehensive. All news about the war had to pass through the Office of War Information (OWI). A “Code of Wartime Practices for the American Press” was issued on Jan 15, 1942 giving strict instructions on proper handling of news. The code was voluntarily adopted by all of the major news organizations and implemented by the more than 1,600 members of the press accredited by the armed forces during the war. The government also relied heavily on reporter’s patriotism, which ensured that in their dispatches from the front lines, they tended to accentuate the positive. John Steinbeck explained how he and other reporters went about their work:
