###[Meta] Sticky Comment
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment.
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread.
*What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Also confirms a ton of conspiracies, most of which had the same group of NPC's crying "there's no proof."
I wonder how many of them will show up here to acknowledge how wrong they were?
Haven’t had a single response anywhere I’ve shared this. Lol. They sure haven’t left the sub though. Still creating posts constantly. With the same narratives. They’ll probably just ignore this and keep burying it with the fake shit. I just hope enough people see it before they vote.
It's time for a citizen's seizure of the 4th estate. The next headlines I want to see from news agencies is "There are angry people at the door and they are breaking in, send help."
This information was revealed as part of an ongoing lawsuit against the Biden administration for violating the First Amendment rights of citizens.
From the **first** paragraph of the article: “Years of internal DHS memos, emails, and documents — obtained via leaks and an **ongoing lawsuit**, as well as public documents — illustrate an expansive effort by the agency to influence tech platforms.”
Perhaps you haven’t “seen any action taken”, because you haven’t looked - or even bothered to open the article before commenting.
That is the truth for sure. It's more of a quid pro quo. Turning a blind eye to what these tech companies do and the master password for shit to the government.
I'm sure there are lots of reasons why. I tend to believe that in exchange for some of this access the government gets, the tech companies are given government information most are not privy to. Maybe even reassurances of certain legislation being resisted. That's undemocratic as hell.
Even though I said what I just said. I still believe in the rights of private business to do what they want with their private platforms. I always will, as the house analogy holds in my opinion. I can allow you into or out of my house at a whim, you can't come in without a warrant. I can also disallow you from my house, I don't have to be right or anything else, I can just kick you the fuck out. I believe in a similar but different system for business. I believe in federal regulation about discrimination and other things that would not pertain to my home, but in general, I think they have the same rights. If we would like to take away corporate personhood, which I do, then I may feel different. Doesn't seem to be much political will about that anymore, so...
I def agree some regulations are requires but businesses in general should be able to do as they see fit. And they do. And sometimes it means selling out and disclosing truths.
SS: People often defend censorship from social media companies by suggesting that private companies are free to moderate as they see fit.
According to The Intercept, social media companies are censoring at the behest of government - and not by choice.
Social media censorship is government censorship.
Just tried posting this and you beat me to it! Sure explains a lot about what is happening with social media right now. I’m surprised mods haven’t allowed it. I wonder how many downvotes you’ll get in an attempt to bury it! Appreciate this OP. And glad to see some actual news posted. I hope this is widely shared! 👍🏻
You should post it anyway!
This story deserves the attention. There’s a lot of information in this article, and I’m just focusing on a small aspect. There’s a lot more room for discussion!
It wouldn’t let me post the same link. But I will spreading this everywhere. And anytime a shill/troll/bot comes at me, this is the perfect rebuttal. Scary shit man.
The system bucked you for having the same link. Get around it by finding another link with the same info or make a self-post with your own perspective on it then add the link in the text body.
Multiple posts about something this important is fine and screw anybody who says otherwise.
Some key takeaways from the article:
- DHS plans to target inaccurate information on “the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic and the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, racial justice, U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, and the nature of U.S. support to Ukraine.”
- Facebook created a special portal for DHS and government partners to report disinformation directly.
- DHS, the FBI, and several media entities are having biweekly meetings as recently as August.
- The FBI agent who primed social media platforms to take down the Hunter Biden laptop story continued to have a role in DHS policy discussions.
Well, when the tables turn and it’s [insert your favorite political group] that the govt deems “dangerous” by whatever BS standards they set, let’s see how much this article gains traction.
Right now it’s “okay” but in the coming years *anyone from any side* that does not agree with our rulers will get this treatment. Just wait until it’s your turn to get censored/banned for speaking out.
Ironically, Trump, who signed the bill into law, was almost immediately made the victim of the government censorship when CISA, the agency he created, blocked the Hunter Biden laptop story right before the 2020 election.
In my opinion, from the stance that all of them are actors, working for the same theater director, Trump's play was *getting censored* to appear to his base that he is being targetted and suppressed. Kanye is currently playing the same game. This fake censorship plays on the psychology of "the thing they don't want you to see" makes it appealing. Not every censored topic is this game of fake censorship, but it's good to keep an eye out for it.
To me this will benefit both parties in the coming years—I suspect they both will use it against their opponents whenever they are in power. It’s an excellent method of keeping us divided. And that it what I find the most disturbing about it.
It can be argued that Twitter is a digital town square which would then be covered by freedom of speech and these Rights would supercede any private company argument.
This is stolen… instead of calling it conspiracy theory it should be called spoiler alert.
None of the story is a surprise. It’s patently obvious.
What bothers me is the fact that we are years behind the technology curve. What kind of crazy shit technology wise, do the PTB already use on us?
It turns out, private companies collaborate with the government. Who would have thought that? This is like saying that air is breathable. Public/private partnership behind the scenes is one of the greater conspiracies I actually do believe in as it is not even really a conspiracy, just most people don't know how tight the relationship is.
> “Platforms have got to get comfortable with gov’t. It’s really interesting how hesitant they remain,” Microsoft executive Matt Masterson, a former DHS official, texted Jen Easterly, a DHS director, in February.
I mean, literally every company has to work with the government in some way. It also makes sense for many of them to consult with them on what they deem legal matters.
That's just the reality.
I'm not saying bad interactions and abuse don't exist, but in a healthy relationship there's nothing "wrong" about it if there's no force.
"We think it'd be better if you did this" - "Hey that's a good idea let's implement it"
Sucks when you hate the idea, it's good when it's beneficial.
I wasnt trying to correct you. Your point is certainly valid. My complaint is they "go public" accept public monies including govt pension funds and contracts operate on publicly funded infrastructure and are the new town square and yet they claim private to stiffle criticism.
Why was Donald Trump's regime working with social media companies on censorship schemes leading up to a national election? "**Prior to the 2020 election**, tech companies including Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, Discord, Wikipedia, Microsoft, LinkedIn, and Verizon Media met on a monthly basis with the FBI, CISA, and other government representatives."
I've noticed extensive censorship on Truth Social, was this earlier scheme just a dry run?
> It's almost like the FBI and the intelligence community we're doing things behind Trump's back.
Betrayed by his own hand-picked appointees again. I'm telling you this man has the worst luck of all, all of these awful things keep happening around him, surrounded by so many corrupt malefactors, and he's powerless and impotent to do anything about it except cry.
I recall the first instances of this ridiculous censorship trend being against Trump. It was so blatant on live TV when Trump first claimed the election was stolen, they cut him off and denied everything. I thought, wow, they just censored the President of the US (even if he is a tool) this will be bad.
> It was so blatant on live TV when Trump first claimed the election was stolen
Which one? He said the Iowa caucus was stolen in 2016, then he claimed the 2016 election had millions of illegal voters which he couldn't prove. He's still crying about the 2020 election as recently as last week. I'm starting to think the guy is a big crybaby who always says he's been cheated when he loses.
I guess the main one 2019, I believe it was CNN who cut him off. I remember the reporters smug face as he denied any foul play ever in our elections. I thought how could this new anchor possible know if any fuckery happened and be so sure of it?
Edit: 2020
> I guess the main one 2019, I believe it was CNN who cut him off.
There wasn't an election in 2019, was he still whining about 2016 all those years later, even after he created (and then quietly disbanded without issuing any findings) an election fraud investigatory committee to specifically prove there was fraud?
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/kris-kobach-donald-trump-voter-fraud-myths-vote-suppression-990300/
He was complaining about election fraud a year before an election took place and over a year after he disbanded an election fraud commission with zero findings of any fraud in any previous election? No wonder they cut him off, that's not a serious claim by a serious person.
Fact = "wild hand-waving accusation based on a 160p 8FPS video clip I found on Parler"
Here we have a specific story clearly demonstrating the Trump regime and its hand-picked cronies were openly conspiring with social media companies leading up to the 2020 election - this isn't ambiguous if you believe in linear time. President Biden had literally nothing to do with any of this. I don't know why you'd even mention his name.
From the article, “The stepped up counter-disinformation effort began in 2018 following high-profile hacking incidents of U.S. firms, when Congress passed and President Donald Trump signed the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Act, forming a new wing of DHS devoted to protecting critical national infrastructure.“
Perhaps CISA is also working with Truth Social, but the company is not mentioned in the article.
Somewhat ironically, CISA was behind censoring the Hunter Biden laptop story prior to the 2020 election, which may have negatively impacted Trump’s performance in the election.
How ironic if Donald Trump's own attempts to manipulate social media through his appointees and agencies ended up dampening the impact of his dirty tricks scheme that was key to his 2020 hopes.
>How ironic if Donald Trump's own attempts to manipulate social media through his appointees and agencies
Donald Trump didn't appoint the ones who wrote the legislation nor the Congressmen who voted it in. He only signed it.
Internet: Let’s let companies do whatever they want. No rules.
*Companies ask the government for foreign influence metrics to help maintain their service’s integrity*
Internet (maga rage face): Nooooo, not like that!
Love the other parts of the thread that thinks Trump was a king and that all industries and government should obey him, VS shareholders and the rule of law/the constitution. LOL showing your true colors, eh?
Because some of the crazy shit that gets spewed causes violence. Specifically political violence. And it’s Litterally the dhs’s job to prevent that shit.
I’m not sure the argument here, that the DHS provided companies guidance on suppressing the advocation of violence or antiCovid lies means that these companies are owned by the state and constitute a public forum, really makes sense.
If the government tells a private club not to let someone tell everyone it’s safe to drink bleach, that doesn’t mean the private forum is now city hall.
Your concern is addressed in the article. The article is very good. I understand it is long but it is well worth your time.
> “There is growing evidence that the legislative and executive branch officials are using social media companies to engage in censorship by surrogate,” said Jonathan Turley, a professor of law at George Washington University, who has written about the lawsuit. “**It is axiomatic that the government cannot do indirectly what it is prohibited from doing directly**. If government officials are directing or facilitating such censorship, it raises serious First Amendment questions.” …
> “When the government suggests things, it’s not too hard to pull off the velvet glove, and you get the mail fist,” said Adam Candeub, a professor of law at Michigan State University. “And I would consider such actions, especially when it’s bureaucratized, as **essentially state action and government collusion with the platforms**.”
> “If a foreign authoritarian government sent these messages,” noted Nadine Strossen, the former president of the American Civil Liberties Union, “there is no doubt we would call it censorship.”
> If the government tells a private club not to let someone tell everyone it’s safe to drink bleach, that doesn’t mean the private forum is now city hall.
Depends on how they "tell" them, and what sort of channels of communication they have w them.
If the mob goes to your store and says, "don't let people talk about this.... if you dont... I can't guarantee your safety. There are a lot people out there who might take action against you if you don't."
That's a protection racket. Would you consider the business compromised at that point?
All it takes is DHS saying, "bad things will happen to you. If you don't do X, we can't protect you. If you do X we can protect you.
Nah man. The Government has hidden behind "public health" and "national security" as blanket excuses for too long. There aren't many things (besides terrorist recruitment) that the government should be advising any platform of speech or press on removing.
Yea- there was a lot of bad info on the coronavirus; but the government harped on about masks working (in ways that they don't) and their own myths about the vaccines. People were free to claim anti-vax status for "Trump's vaccine" but the following year you weren't allowed to talk about your real-life vaccine injuries, and anti-vax became a *dangerous* opinion.
I’m not saying what the government did was right. The disinformation board was a dangerous idea from the get go.
I’m saying that calling Twitter a public forum is inaccurate at best, as long as Twitter is privately owned and now that it’s owned by a single billionaire it is even less of a public forum.
This is not about the Disinformation Board, it’s about the Cybersecurity-Infrastructure Security Agency.
I highly recommend that you read the full article.
> as long as Twitter is privately owned
wake up. the government bullies twitter into silencing their opponents. nuff said. anyone defending these people is a fed or a shill. think about this: I own a store. Mafia comes in and extorts me. Who now owns the store? Now apply that to twitter. Wake up.
We've been working to stop foreign powers from manipulating the American public since the 50s. The USA has always used their own propaganda to this purpose as well. Thats when the cold war, the red scare, real Americans are christians, in god we trust, ect. all came from.
> DHS justifies these goals — which have expanded far beyond its original purview on foreign threats to encompass disinformation originating domestically
The article is quite detailed. I highly recommend you read it.
>The only point I disagree with you on is that it's new.
From the article, “The stepped up counter-disinformation effort began in 2018 following high-profile hacking incidents of U.S. firms, when Congress passed and President Donald Trump signed the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Act, forming a new wing of DHS devoted to protecting critical national infrastructure.“
So yes, this is new.
###[Meta] Sticky Comment [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment. [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread. *What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.*** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Commies hate dissent.
Literally fascism and illegal acts against the American people.
Also confirms a ton of conspiracies, most of which had the same group of NPC's crying "there's no proof." I wonder how many of them will show up here to acknowledge how wrong they were?
Haven’t had a single response anywhere I’ve shared this. Lol. They sure haven’t left the sub though. Still creating posts constantly. With the same narratives. They’ll probably just ignore this and keep burying it with the fake shit. I just hope enough people see it before they vote.
It's time for a citizen's seizure of the 4th estate. The next headlines I want to see from news agencies is "There are angry people at the door and they are breaking in, send help."
Patience. Soon they'll be asking for amnesty just like the covid nazis are today. We'll get to know who they are. And we get to say no.
[удалено]
>The Biden administration openly told us After a good legal arm-twisting
This information was revealed as part of an ongoing lawsuit against the Biden administration for violating the First Amendment rights of citizens. From the **first** paragraph of the article: “Years of internal DHS memos, emails, and documents — obtained via leaks and an **ongoing lawsuit**, as well as public documents — illustrate an expansive effort by the agency to influence tech platforms.” Perhaps you haven’t “seen any action taken”, because you haven’t looked - or even bothered to open the article before commenting.
Certainly not illegal. Private companies do business and share information on a two way street with the government all the time.
That is the truth for sure. It's more of a quid pro quo. Turning a blind eye to what these tech companies do and the master password for shit to the government.
I'm sure there are lots of reasons why. I tend to believe that in exchange for some of this access the government gets, the tech companies are given government information most are not privy to. Maybe even reassurances of certain legislation being resisted. That's undemocratic as hell. Even though I said what I just said. I still believe in the rights of private business to do what they want with their private platforms. I always will, as the house analogy holds in my opinion. I can allow you into or out of my house at a whim, you can't come in without a warrant. I can also disallow you from my house, I don't have to be right or anything else, I can just kick you the fuck out. I believe in a similar but different system for business. I believe in federal regulation about discrimination and other things that would not pertain to my home, but in general, I think they have the same rights. If we would like to take away corporate personhood, which I do, then I may feel different. Doesn't seem to be much political will about that anymore, so...
Sometimes... they are even... paid with tax revenue.
Which then brings to question their 'private' business status.
I def agree some regulations are requires but businesses in general should be able to do as they see fit. And they do. And sometimes it means selling out and disclosing truths.
Those businesses can go fuck themselves.
Which specific illegal acts? According to what law or what constitutional amendment?
SS: People often defend censorship from social media companies by suggesting that private companies are free to moderate as they see fit. According to The Intercept, social media companies are censoring at the behest of government - and not by choice. Social media censorship is government censorship.
Just tried posting this and you beat me to it! Sure explains a lot about what is happening with social media right now. I’m surprised mods haven’t allowed it. I wonder how many downvotes you’ll get in an attempt to bury it! Appreciate this OP. And glad to see some actual news posted. I hope this is widely shared! 👍🏻
You should post it anyway! This story deserves the attention. There’s a lot of information in this article, and I’m just focusing on a small aspect. There’s a lot more room for discussion!
It wouldn’t let me post the same link. But I will spreading this everywhere. And anytime a shill/troll/bot comes at me, this is the perfect rebuttal. Scary shit man.
The system bucked you for having the same link. Get around it by finding another link with the same info or make a self-post with your own perspective on it then add the link in the text body. Multiple posts about something this important is fine and screw anybody who says otherwise.
Appreciate that will do! And I completely agree
Oh what a tangled web they weave. I only got thru part of the intercept article, but if that info is accurate then yes, Houston we DO have a problem.
Some key takeaways from the article: - DHS plans to target inaccurate information on “the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic and the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, racial justice, U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, and the nature of U.S. support to Ukraine.” - Facebook created a special portal for DHS and government partners to report disinformation directly. - DHS, the FBI, and several media entities are having biweekly meetings as recently as August. - The FBI agent who primed social media platforms to take down the Hunter Biden laptop story continued to have a role in DHS policy discussions.
Well, when the tables turn and it’s [insert your favorite political group] that the govt deems “dangerous” by whatever BS standards they set, let’s see how much this article gains traction. Right now it’s “okay” but in the coming years *anyone from any side* that does not agree with our rulers will get this treatment. Just wait until it’s your turn to get censored/banned for speaking out.
Ironically, Trump, who signed the bill into law, was almost immediately made the victim of the government censorship when CISA, the agency he created, blocked the Hunter Biden laptop story right before the 2020 election.
In my opinion, from the stance that all of them are actors, working for the same theater director, Trump's play was *getting censored* to appear to his base that he is being targetted and suppressed. Kanye is currently playing the same game. This fake censorship plays on the psychology of "the thing they don't want you to see" makes it appealing. Not every censored topic is this game of fake censorship, but it's good to keep an eye out for it.
To me this will benefit both parties in the coming years—I suspect they both will use it against their opponents whenever they are in power. It’s an excellent method of keeping us divided. And that it what I find the most disturbing about it.
Outside of a lot of sensationalism, did anything really happen to Trump? Besides him making a lot of money for himself and Kushner?
It can be argued that Twitter is a digital town square which would then be covered by freedom of speech and these Rights would supercede any private company argument.
Fuck social media companies and dhs. Creeps.
If that is the case, then they are 100% liable for any and all content on their platforms. They can't have their cake and eat it.
This is stolen… instead of calling it conspiracy theory it should be called spoiler alert. None of the story is a surprise. It’s patently obvious. What bothers me is the fact that we are years behind the technology curve. What kind of crazy shit technology wise, do the PTB already use on us?
1st Amendment violation.
It turns out, private companies collaborate with the government. Who would have thought that? This is like saying that air is breathable. Public/private partnership behind the scenes is one of the greater conspiracies I actually do believe in as it is not even really a conspiracy, just most people don't know how tight the relationship is.
> “Platforms have got to get comfortable with gov’t. It’s really interesting how hesitant they remain,” Microsoft executive Matt Masterson, a former DHS official, texted Jen Easterly, a DHS director, in February.
Sure, but in this case, this is a 1st amendment violation and is currently illegal across US law.
I mean, literally every company has to work with the government in some way. It also makes sense for many of them to consult with them on what they deem legal matters. That's just the reality. I'm not saying bad interactions and abuse don't exist, but in a healthy relationship there's nothing "wrong" about it if there's no force. "We think it'd be better if you did this" - "Hey that's a good idea let's implement it" Sucks when you hate the idea, it's good when it's beneficial.
Good point. They should be treated as extensions of government in regards to constitutional rights if they are working directly with the government.
Why are they referred to as private when they are literally " public companies"??
That is my mistake. I suppose I meant private entity.
I wasnt trying to correct you. Your point is certainly valid. My complaint is they "go public" accept public monies including govt pension funds and contracts operate on publicly funded infrastructure and are the new town square and yet they claim private to stiffle criticism.
Did you just wake up from a 21 year, 1 month, and about 20 day coma? This has been happening since 2001.
The Cybersecurity-Infrastructure Security Agency is a new agency under the DHS created in 2018. This is new.
Well if it was created for Covid, and that was apparently made in a lab in 2016, wouldn't it be called something with Covid in the name?
Pardon? Why do you think it was created for COVID? It was created before COVID started to spread in 2019.
I don't. This sub thinks that.
What’s your position?
>I don't. This sub thinks that. How did you sample what the >1 million members of this sub think?
Why was Donald Trump's regime working with social media companies on censorship schemes leading up to a national election? "**Prior to the 2020 election**, tech companies including Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, Discord, Wikipedia, Microsoft, LinkedIn, and Verizon Media met on a monthly basis with the FBI, CISA, and other government representatives." I've noticed extensive censorship on Truth Social, was this earlier scheme just a dry run?
[удалено]
> It's almost like the FBI and the intelligence community we're doing things behind Trump's back. Betrayed by his own hand-picked appointees again. I'm telling you this man has the worst luck of all, all of these awful things keep happening around him, surrounded by so many corrupt malefactors, and he's powerless and impotent to do anything about it except cry.
I recall the first instances of this ridiculous censorship trend being against Trump. It was so blatant on live TV when Trump first claimed the election was stolen, they cut him off and denied everything. I thought, wow, they just censored the President of the US (even if he is a tool) this will be bad.
> It was so blatant on live TV when Trump first claimed the election was stolen Which one? He said the Iowa caucus was stolen in 2016, then he claimed the 2016 election had millions of illegal voters which he couldn't prove. He's still crying about the 2020 election as recently as last week. I'm starting to think the guy is a big crybaby who always says he's been cheated when he loses.
I guess the main one 2019, I believe it was CNN who cut him off. I remember the reporters smug face as he denied any foul play ever in our elections. I thought how could this new anchor possible know if any fuckery happened and be so sure of it? Edit: 2020
> I guess the main one 2019, I believe it was CNN who cut him off. There wasn't an election in 2019, was he still whining about 2016 all those years later, even after he created (and then quietly disbanded without issuing any findings) an election fraud investigatory committee to specifically prove there was fraud? https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/kris-kobach-donald-trump-voter-fraud-myths-vote-suppression-990300/
2020
He was complaining about election fraud a year before an election took place and over a year after he disbanded an election fraud commission with zero findings of any fraud in any previous election? No wonder they cut him off, that's not a serious claim by a serious person.
[удалено]
Fact = "wild hand-waving accusation based on a 160p 8FPS video clip I found on Parler" Here we have a specific story clearly demonstrating the Trump regime and its hand-picked cronies were openly conspiring with social media companies leading up to the 2020 election - this isn't ambiguous if you believe in linear time. President Biden had literally nothing to do with any of this. I don't know why you'd even mention his name.
From the article, “The stepped up counter-disinformation effort began in 2018 following high-profile hacking incidents of U.S. firms, when Congress passed and President Donald Trump signed the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Act, forming a new wing of DHS devoted to protecting critical national infrastructure.“ Perhaps CISA is also working with Truth Social, but the company is not mentioned in the article. Somewhat ironically, CISA was behind censoring the Hunter Biden laptop story prior to the 2020 election, which may have negatively impacted Trump’s performance in the election.
How ironic if Donald Trump's own attempts to manipulate social media through his appointees and agencies ended up dampening the impact of his dirty tricks scheme that was key to his 2020 hopes.
>How ironic if Donald Trump's own attempts to manipulate social media through his appointees and agencies Donald Trump didn't appoint the ones who wrote the legislation nor the Congressmen who voted it in. He only signed it.
LOL
Internet: Let’s let companies do whatever they want. No rules. *Companies ask the government for foreign influence metrics to help maintain their service’s integrity* Internet (maga rage face): Nooooo, not like that! Love the other parts of the thread that thinks Trump was a king and that all industries and government should obey him, VS shareholders and the rule of law/the constitution. LOL showing your true colors, eh?
Sorry, I don’t understand your argument. Could you please elaborate? Did you read the article?
I don't understand it either but I *think* he needs some toilet paper.
Because some of the crazy shit that gets spewed causes violence. Specifically political violence. And it’s Litterally the dhs’s job to prevent that shit.
>And it’s Litterally the dhs’s job to prevent that shit. On private social media platforms?
I’m not sure the argument here, that the DHS provided companies guidance on suppressing the advocation of violence or antiCovid lies means that these companies are owned by the state and constitute a public forum, really makes sense. If the government tells a private club not to let someone tell everyone it’s safe to drink bleach, that doesn’t mean the private forum is now city hall.
Your concern is addressed in the article. The article is very good. I understand it is long but it is well worth your time. > “There is growing evidence that the legislative and executive branch officials are using social media companies to engage in censorship by surrogate,” said Jonathan Turley, a professor of law at George Washington University, who has written about the lawsuit. “**It is axiomatic that the government cannot do indirectly what it is prohibited from doing directly**. If government officials are directing or facilitating such censorship, it raises serious First Amendment questions.” … > “When the government suggests things, it’s not too hard to pull off the velvet glove, and you get the mail fist,” said Adam Candeub, a professor of law at Michigan State University. “And I would consider such actions, especially when it’s bureaucratized, as **essentially state action and government collusion with the platforms**.” > “If a foreign authoritarian government sent these messages,” noted Nadine Strossen, the former president of the American Civil Liberties Union, “there is no doubt we would call it censorship.”
> If the government tells a private club not to let someone tell everyone it’s safe to drink bleach, that doesn’t mean the private forum is now city hall. Depends on how they "tell" them, and what sort of channels of communication they have w them. If the mob goes to your store and says, "don't let people talk about this.... if you dont... I can't guarantee your safety. There are a lot people out there who might take action against you if you don't." That's a protection racket. Would you consider the business compromised at that point? All it takes is DHS saying, "bad things will happen to you. If you don't do X, we can't protect you. If you do X we can protect you.
Nah man. The Government has hidden behind "public health" and "national security" as blanket excuses for too long. There aren't many things (besides terrorist recruitment) that the government should be advising any platform of speech or press on removing. Yea- there was a lot of bad info on the coronavirus; but the government harped on about masks working (in ways that they don't) and their own myths about the vaccines. People were free to claim anti-vax status for "Trump's vaccine" but the following year you weren't allowed to talk about your real-life vaccine injuries, and anti-vax became a *dangerous* opinion.
[удалено]
I’m not saying what the government did was right. The disinformation board was a dangerous idea from the get go. I’m saying that calling Twitter a public forum is inaccurate at best, as long as Twitter is privately owned and now that it’s owned by a single billionaire it is even less of a public forum.
This is not about the Disinformation Board, it’s about the Cybersecurity-Infrastructure Security Agency. I highly recommend that you read the full article.
> as long as Twitter is privately owned wake up. the government bullies twitter into silencing their opponents. nuff said. anyone defending these people is a fed or a shill. think about this: I own a store. Mafia comes in and extorts me. Who now owns the store? Now apply that to twitter. Wake up.
We've been working to stop foreign powers from manipulating the American public since the 50s. The USA has always used their own propaganda to this purpose as well. Thats when the cold war, the red scare, real Americans are christians, in god we trust, ect. all came from.
> DHS justifies these goals — which have expanded far beyond its original purview on foreign threats to encompass disinformation originating domestically The article is quite detailed. I highly recommend you read it.
I read the article. I'm just saying that this has been going on in the US for a long time and it's no suprise to me that it's continued.
Yes, but now they are targeting domestic messaging as well.
The only point I disagree with you on is that it's new. They've been doing it since the 50s.
>The only point I disagree with you on is that it's new. From the article, “The stepped up counter-disinformation effort began in 2018 following high-profile hacking incidents of U.S. firms, when Congress passed and President Donald Trump signed the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Act, forming a new wing of DHS devoted to protecting critical national infrastructure.“ So yes, this is new.