Zuckerberg Confirms Biden's Administration Pressure to Censor Facebook

[NxNW]

So we know now, without a shadow of a doubt, that the Dems suppress free speech if it is against their policies...

No free speech was suppressed.

 

[IceJad]

No free speech was suppressed.

Yes there were. Just because the attempts didn't extinguished the stories do not mean suppression didn't take place. A failed robbery is still a robbery. A failed assassination is still an assassination. An attempt was made to suppress information; officially I may add. By any standard it still tantamount to suppression of private free speech.

 

[NxNW]

A failed robbery is still a robbery.

False.

A failed assassination is still an assassination.

False.

An attempt was made to suppress information; officially I may add. By any standard it still tantamount to suppression of private free speech.

Did Congress pass a law restricting fee speech? Was any speech actually suppressed?

 

[NxNW]

The issue is not the suppression, it is the government sponsorship of the suppression. If this was a private corporation making responsible decisions I would be fine with it. The idea of the government deciding what is allowed is very problematic no matter what administration initiated it.

But this never happened.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

No free speech was suppressed.

Or course it was.

 

[NxNW]

Or course it was.

When did Congress pass a law limiting free speech?

 

[DaisyDay]

The problem is that I couldn't talk to my family and close friends on that platform about alternative medicine. I believe is more of corporatism with our government.

You know what they call "alternative medicine" that works? "Medicine".

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

When did Congress pass a law limiting free speech?

I never said they did. Please pay attention...

 

[stevil]

The problem is that I couldn't talk to my family and close friends on that platform about alternative medicine. I believe is more of corporatism with our government.

It seems that Facebook were doing a good job of stamping out misinformation then. Misinformation is one thing, but when it gets in the way of people saving their lives is a whole 'nother level.
If you were trying to get your friends to not take vaccines but instead take Ivermectin anti worming pills which works on biological parasites and not viruses or HCQ which doesn't work at all, then perhaps it is lucky for your friends that they didn't get your message. But no doubt you sent your message via other means.

 

[stevil]

You know what they call "alternative medicine" that works? "Medicine".

True that!... I mean if alternative facts were true, they would just be facts. No one that tells the truth says that they are offering alternative facts.

Alternative medicine is quackery. Suitable for people that are either:
- super desperate because all the medicine they have tried so far either hasn't worked or has had bad side effects
- paranoid with conspiracies against doctors, and pharmacies
- hyper partisan and spiteful, willing to do things detrimental to themselves and their family and friends in order to support their favourite political party and troll the opposition.

 

[Laodicean60]

If you were trying to get your friends to not take vaccines but instead take Ivermectin anti worming pills which works on biological parasites and not viruses or HCQ which doesn't work at all, then perhaps it is lucky for your friends that they didn't get your message. But no doubt you sent your message via other means.

It doesn't matter what I wanted to communicate with my family. No censorship.

 

[NxNW]

I never said they did. Please pay attention...

If they didn't, the First Amendment was not violated.

 

[stevil]

It doesn't matter what I wanted to communicate with my family. No censorship.

The government is concerned with the health and safety of people in its society. That is one of the core obligations of a government. So they reached out to social media organisation and informed them of the dangers of misinformation that could lead to unnecessary deaths in the country. The social media organisation then choose to suppress that dangerous (potentially lethal) misinformation.

I understand that maybe you don't like the idea of government working with private organisations in an attempt to save lives, and maybe you don't like the idea of provate organisations such as social media owners providing moderation and censorship. But that is what you get with Facebook. There might be other social media systems that are less moderated.

 

[IceJad]

False.

False.

Did Congress pass a law restricting fee speech? Was any speech actually suppressed?

Firstly I think you need to talk to a lawyer before you say false. No judge will say you're free to go because you didn't manage to rob or kill. That's not how the law works.

Secondly we are not talking about congress and law here. We are talking about government overreach. A government agency using (abusing) its powers and authority to force a private company to comply to orders contrary to the First Amendment. It was the FBI under Biden's watch. Please read the BBC article or if you want just watch the YouTube video.

 

[IceJad]

If they didn't, the First Amendment was not violated.

The first Amendment was violated when the administrator ordered private companies to demote or remove contents by private citizens.

It doesn't have to come in the form of a law. This case it came in the form of a government agency which is the FBI.

 

[IceJad]

It seems that Facebook were doing a good job of stamping out misinformation then. Misinformation is one thing, but when it gets in the way of people saving their lives is a whole 'nother level.
If you were trying to get your friends to not take vaccines but instead take Ivermectin anti worming pills which works on biological parasites and not viruses or HCQ which doesn't work at all, then perhaps it is lucky for your friends that they didn't get your message. But no doubt you sent your message via other means.

To you it is all about anti-vaccination. But Facebook did more than just that. What about the Hunter Biden laptop story? What right does the FBI have to ask Facebook to demote the story because they think it is Russian propaganda? Which ended up being true. Facebook was wrong and the FBI was wrong. What now? Stop using COVID to shield the government from what is obviously wrong.

 

[stevil]

To you it is all about anti-vaccination. But Facebook did more than just that. What about the Hunter Biden laptop story? What right does the FBI have to ask Facebook to demote the story because they think it is Russian propaganda? Which ended up being true. Facebook was wrong and the FBI was wrong. What now? Stop using COVID to shield the government from what is obviously wrong.

Yeah the Hunter laptop story is a different kettle of fish.

As far as I understand it, the FBI didn't ask Facebook to suppress stories on the laptop.
What happened was that the FBI warned facebook that the Russians were being active with disinfromation in the lead up to the USA presidential election. The FBI didn't tie this to the laptop story at all.

Zuckerberg told Rogan: "The background here is that the FBI came to us - some folks on our team - and was like 'hey, just so you know, you should be on high alert. We thought there was a lot of Russian propaganda in the 2016 election, we have it on notice that basically there's about to be some kind of dump that's similar to that'."

He said the FBI did not warn Facebook about the Biden story in particular - only that Facebook thought it "fit that pattern".

It was Facebook that assumed the Laptop story was Russian disinformation.
I can understand how they would have come to that assumption, because the story as it was breaking, sounded nuts. Hunter dropping off his laptop at a everyday fixit store and not bothering to collect it. The owner being blind, not seeing Hunter drop it off. The owner then being a Republican supporter and looking through the contents as if it is his business and then giving a copy of the drive to Rudy Guiliani. It just sounded completely nuts.

But, anyway. The government and the FBI did not tell facebook to bury the story.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

If they didn't, the First Amendment was not violated.

Suppressing free speech does not require a change in the first amendment. The Gov coerced and pressured Zuckerburg. Republicans were right: Zuckerberg admits Biden administration censored your Facebook feed

 

[essentialsaltes]

Firstly I think you need to talk to a lawyer before you say false.

How about 9 Justices?

Justices side with Biden over government’s influence on social media content moderation​

Writing for the majority, Justice Amy Coney Barrett cited the lack of any “concrete link” between the restrictions that the plaintiffs complained of and the conduct of government officials – and in any event, she concluded, a court order blocking communication between government officials and social media companies likely would not have any effect on decision-making by those platforms, which can continue to enforce their policies.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Yeah the Hunter laptop story is a different kettle of fish.

As far as I understand it, the FBI didn't ask Facebook to suppress stories on the laptop.
What happened was that the FBI warned facebook that the Russians were being active with disinfromation in the lead up to the USA presidential election. The FBI didn't tie this to the laptop story at all.

But, anyway. The government and the FBI did not tell facebook to bury the story.

Let's also keep in mind that Trump was President at that time. There was no Biden Administration influence on anything.