Facebook To Start Regulating Criticism Of Journalists — Enabling Censorship & Propaganda.

* The new regulations come amid calls for more censorship.

* The social media giant has a demonstrable history of bias and selective enforcement.

* This illustrates that the new regulations will likely be used for the same draconian behavior Facebook has come to be known for.

 

Via Break The Matrix | Don Via Jr.

The social media company has announced new regulations which will be used to curtail the criticisms of the mainstream press.

As predicted, in the wake of the media frenzy surrounding the so-called Facebook “whistleblower” — who, unlike real whistleblowers, received a red carpet roll out after calling for more censorship. Facebook is moving forward with plans to do exactly that.

As reported by Reuters, Facebook’s Chief of Global Safety, Antigone Davis, has confirmed that the company will be taking steps to reclassify journalists and activists as “involuntary public figures”. In an effort to offer protections against bullying and harassment.

First and foremost we should acknowledge the obvious. In no way are Journalists involuntary public figures. Neither are activists. We get into this line of work knowing full well, for better or worse, that our choosing to do so constitutes us as a public figure in some capacity.

It comes with the territory, it is a conscious decision made by each of us. There is nothing “involuntary” about it.

Furthermore, the question we should all be asking is, what constitutes bullying and harassment? And whom will decide who is and is not a journalist and or activist?

In terms of what constitutes harassment, the statement released by Facebook points out the most obvious of offenses. Death threats, sexual harassment, and bigotry. Noble sentiments indeed, and if it just stopped there we likely wouldn’t be having this conversation.

But we are talking about Facebook, after all.

The company has routinely utilized the most noble of intentions to justify draconian actions. Most notably with its censorship, and blatant attacks against the First Amendment. Including freedom of speech in general and freedom of the press specifically.

Blatantly unconstitutional since Facebook is in fact not a private company, as its proponents claim.

In addition to already having been exposed coordinating their censorship through neocon think-tank the Atlantic Council. As well as having a revolving door pipeline between its executives and the federal government. In recent months it has also been outright admitted the company maintains a relationship with the White House to direct policy.

Facebook has been regularly called out for its selective enforcement of its own policies. To the point that the social media giant can be validly accused of disseminating propaganda. A glaring example of which can be found in two specific instances.

Recently CNN has been rightly put in the hot seat for its deceptive coverage of Joe Rogan and Ivermectin. In which the news agency intentionally derogatorily framed the drug which — has been hailed for its ability to treat human ailments — as merely a “livestock dewormer”. And slandered Rogan’s use of the drug in the process.

These were blatant lies propagated by a mainstream news agency, deliberately twisting the facts to shape a particular narrative. This was misinformation. Something that Facebook claims to fight against.

And yet when CNN disseminated this propaganda on Facebook’s platform, not once did they receive a strike for violating Facebook’s community standards. Not once was any of the coverage scrutinized by the company’s “independent fact-checkers”. Nor were any of their accounts given a suspension.

They were caught red-handed spreading medical misinformation and they were let off scot-free.

Compare and contrast this incident with an experience by yours truly, and see if you can find the hypocrisy.

In May of this year Break The Matrix was once again the target of Facebook’s censorship.

Shortly after posting a meme pointing out the unscrupulous history of pharmaceutical manufacturers currently involved in the development of the Covid-19 vaccinations, the meme was removed from Facebook.

After which BTM was given a 24-hour suspension and an account strike, followed by a warning that further violations may result in a permanent ban from the platform.

The reason? Facebook claimed this was because of spreading “medical misinformation”. Stating in an automated message after disputing the decision —

“We don’t allow false information that could cause physical harm. In some cases this includes information that recognized health organizations say could mislead people about how to cure or prevent a disease or that could discourage people from seeking medical treatment.”

The problem? All information displayed in the meme was 100% verifiable fact.

As reported by The Free Thought Project at the time, every single word of the graphic is easily proven to be true using accepted mainstream sources.

So this is the inverted reality that is said to constitute the measure of integrity with which Facebook holds its “community standards”.

Deliberate fake news espoused by corporate media pundits is not only accepted and permissible, but widely circulated. While factual news, crucial to the public interest for maintaining informed consent, is banned and penalized.

This is the exact same kind of misuse we can expect to come from these new regulations.

Not solely as a means of protecting those in the public sphere from threats and intimidation, to facilitate a broad public discourse.

But to further suppress any critique of establishment press, stifle discourse, and silence dissidents.

A recent Twitter thread via Glenn Greenwald summed it up quite concisely —

“To appease the endless campaigns of journalists to pressure Facebook to censor more, Facebook is now removing journalists from the “public figure” category, meaning the freedom to criticize journalists and engage in activism against their work will be sharply curtailed.”

“Of course journalists are public figures. They chose a job that enables them to shape public discourse, ruin reputations, manipulate public perceptions, and so much else.

That they should be shielded from public critique is deranged, but it’s a pervasive view they now have.”

“Journalists have been increasingly equating any criticisms of them with “harassment” or “bullying.” So often, if a journalist publishes a false or defamatory article and people object, they cast themselves as the victims. Facebook’s rule change reflects this self-pitying view.”

“One could call this the “Taylor Lorenz Syndrome.” So many journalists go around casually ruining the lives and reputations of even private, powerless, obscure people, then instantly claim they’re the real victim when people object to that and critique their work (“harassment!”).”

So rest assured, much like every other policy implemented by this company on behalf of the establishment. We can guarantee that this too will be abused, misused, and selectively enforced to suppress dissent and favor the status quo. Because when it comes to the State and Big Tech, protecting the narrative behind their agenda is what matters. Facts be damned.

 

Like this content and want to see more? Find Break The Matrix on social media here!

Comments

comments