GOP senator unveils bill demanding fed watchdogs keep Congress in the loop on censorship by agencies

[Say it aint so]

How does a government decide what you may or may not read, outside of a Dictatorship?

Hunter's laptop was not misinformation; the Biden administration's false narrative was.

They aren't. In this case they are appraising social media sites of misinformation that is harmful to the general public during a pandemic. That is final decision is left to content managers.

Come Hunter's laptop there was not Biden admin. There was a Biden campaign. Meaning they were not government. What they asked to be reviewed where Hunter's D pictures which should have been censored anyway.

 

[BCP1928]

How does a government decide what you may or may not read, outside of a Dictatorship?

Hunter's laptop was not misinformation; the Biden administration's false narrative was.

In the end, though, censorship did not prevail. Your good Christian leadership in Congress took it upon themselves to show us the pictures of Hunter Biden naked and having sex with a prostitute on network TV during prime family viewing hours.

 

[HARK!]

Yes, better for those content providers in audience which results in revenue, but as far as this idea from Jefferson, it's the worse:

"An enlightened citizenry is indispensable for the proper functioning of a republic. Self-government is not possible unless the citizens are educated sufficiently to enable them to exercise oversight. It is therefore imperative that the nation see to it that a suitable education be provided for all its citizens."​

Ummm. I case you didn't realize it, censoring the truth, and setting the algorithm to push lies, is not conducive to furthering education.

 

[HARK!]

Come Hunter's laptop there was not Biden admin. There was a Biden campaign.

Thanks for pointing that out. We wouldn't want Biden to lose out on any credit.

 

[Say it aint so]

Thanks for pointing that out. We wouldn't want Biden to lose out on any credit.

But that is nothing new. Social media get requests from people asking for content removed all the time. Again, the Biden campaign asked for Hunter's D pictures to be removed which you oddly enough cut out of my quote. I recall the social media hearing. The only government in Taibbi's twitter threads that asked content to be removed was in fact the Trump administration. Funny how that's not touched upon by you guys here.

 

[HARK!]

But that is nothing new. Social media get requests from people asking for content removed all the time. Again, the Biden campaign asked for Hunter's D pictures to be removed which you oddly enough cut out of my quote. I recall the social media hearing. The only government in Taibbi's twitter threads that asked content to be removed was in fact the Trump administration. Funny how that's not touched upon by you guys here.

So you would be OK if the Trump administration did a McCarthy style hatchet job on Democrats?

If that's the case I could make a few phone calls to seek to make this a bipartisan effort. I know people of influence.

 

[NxNW]

How does a government decide what you may or may not read, outside of a Dictatorship?

That's not what happened.

Hunter's laptop was not misinformation; the Biden administration's false narrative was.

There was no false narrative.

 

[HARK!]

There was no false narrative.

That's yet another false narrative; but if the lamestream media's dreams come true; Trump will step up as Dictator, and shut down their propaganda machine.

The jig is up.

JOE ROGAN IS FUMING...

Go to http://rumble.com/premium/brand and use code BRAND to save $10 off! Watch my new Locals series 'The Oracles' here: https://russellbrand.locals.com/upost/6159441/the-last-pandemic-and-the-next-pa

rumble.com

 

[Laodicean60]

How is alerting the public that the masks weren't working "harmful information?

The problem with masks is that no one has taught the public about masking. Anyone who puts on PPE is trained in the proper use of PPE. Instead, we have people running around with bandanas and other non-medically approved equipment. I saw it as a joke and our government wasn't taking it seriously.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

They aren't. In this case they are appraising social media sites of misinformation that is harmful to the general public during a pandemic. That is final decision is left to content managers.

That seems like a "creative framing" of what was actually happening during that time.

Some of the actions were "indirect" or "implied" threats about what was going to happen if the social media companies didn't adopt a ToS and censorship protocol that was to their liking.

If it was really "left up to the content managers", and wasn't aimed at any type of coercion, then what was the point of hauling all of the tech executives up to DC to put them on the hot seat and get grilled by a dozen Senators?

There's an aspect of Constitutional law known as the State Actor Doctrine...

In a nutshell, it basically dictates that anything the government wouldn't be allowed to themselves (with regards to individual rights), they can't ask a non-government entity to enforce on their behalf. And if the government is enlisting the services of a private entity in some sort of "public/private partnership" or, if a private entity is a performing a task that would normally be the function of government, that private entity is then constrained by the rules of the constitution when performing that task.

When they called up the tech Execs to get grilled by the Senate, they were treading that line.

Forcing a tech CEO to come up to Capitol Hill to ask "What has your organization been doing to prevent this kind of misinformation we don't like?"
(with the backdrop of them openly acknowledging they want to revisit Section 230), can't really be seen as anything other than a thinly veiled attempt at coercion.

 

[Say it aint so]

The death numbers would be a lot different if we were a healthy nation we're one of the unhealthiest! No, the government should not be working with a "platform" and restricting information that goes from me to my family members no matter how serious it is, period!

You want the government to manage your health issues and make decisions for you, but I have to ask you to look back on the last 30 years and tell me they are doing a good job managing our health because it's all cooperate-driven. Be careful who you trust because it's Elites who are out of touch with us serfs and desiring prosperity causes downward pressure on us.

Of course I disagree. It would be malpractice for a government to sit on it's hands and let information, often information from troll farms from adversarial countries, to place it's citizens at harm as the country is overwhelmed in every facet with a deadly pandemic. It is the very function of the NIH to advise for general welfare it's people; including media. Now, those platforms can just as equally go tell government to go pound sand. And no, government is NOT making decisions for you. Government is not stopping anyone from ingesting disinfectant as a covid cure. People actually exercised that option. They are now dead. You still had freedom, as exampled during the pandemic to "do your own research". You may recall those folks on TV in ICUs gasping like a newly landed fish expressing regret of their decision. And yes, SARS, AIDS, Cholera, the Spanish Flu and so on, those guiding institutions have been pretty successful. Don't confuse them with the corporate driven bribery within congress that places those corps over their own constitutes. It is important to keep those agency headed by a competent individual who is schooled in public health outbreaks, and not an health economist like this latest nominee who advocated for herd immunity. That would have been a disaster.

 

[Say it aint so]

That seems like a "creative framing" of what was actually happening during that time.

Some of the actions were "indirect" or "implied" threats about what was going to happen if the social media companies didn't adopt a ToS and censorship protocol that was to their liking.

If it was really "left up to the content managers", and wasn't aimed at any type of coercion, then what was the point of hauling all of the tech executives up to DC to put them on the hot seat and get grilled by a dozen Senators?

There's an aspect of Constitutional law known as the State Actor Doctrine...

In a nutshell, it basically dictates that anything the government wouldn't be allowed to themselves (with regards to individual rights), they can't ask a non-government entity to enforce on their behalf. And if the government is enlisting the services of a private entity in some sort of "public/private partnership" or, if a private entity is a performing a task that would normally be the function of government, that private entity is then constrained by the rules of the constitution when performing that task.

When they called up the tech Execs to get grilled by the Senate, they were treading that line.

Forcing a tech CEO to come up to Capitol Hill to ask "What has your organization been doing to prevent this kind of misinformation we don't like?"
(with the backdrop of them openly acknowledging they want to revisit Section 230), can't really be seen as anything other than a thinly veiled attempt at coercion.

It's the 118th United States Congress.
It's the same congress that wants to call state and district prosecutors who they have no jurisdiction over and place them in the hot seat.

 

[Laodicean60]

It would be malpractice for a government to sit on it's hands and let information, often information from troll farms from adversarial countries, to place it's citizens at harm as the country is overwhelmed in every facet with a deadly pandemic.

But we live in America, and free speech? I'm smart enough to make my own decisions based on information, and the government wasn't aligned with science in some of their policy and propaganda. As I said before the health epidemic was worse because we are an unhealthy nation, and many needed the vaccine. But the root cause for the multitude of deaths is because of preconditions.

When we speak about an unhealthy nation; is the government telling people about processed foods, and lowering the added sugar on warning labels, why does the EU have better health laws than the USA, this is why I'm glad RFK might have some input.

So no, I don't need other OLD clowns telling me how to live my life. Corporatism.

And no, government is NOT making decisions for you.

They did with government employees some lost their jobs over it.

 

[Say it aint so]

But we live in America, and free speech? I'm smart enough to make my own decisions based on information, and the government wasn't aligned with science in some of their policy and propaganda. As I said before the health epidemic was worse because we are an unhealthy nation, and many needed the vaccine. But the root cause for the multitude of deaths is because of preconditions.

When we speak about an unhealthy nation; is the government telling people about processed foods, and lowering the added sugar on warning labels, why does the EU have better health laws than the USA, this is why I'm glad RFK might have some input.

So no, I don't need other OLD clowns telling me how to live my life. Corporatism.

They did with government employees some lost their jobs over it.

No, you do not have absolute free speech. The yelling fire in a crowded theater thing for example. It simply means all speech is not within the scope of free speech protections. Disinformation during a pandemic where there are hundreds of thousands of deaths, overran ICUs, and overworked first responders in my eyes should definitely fall under that. But that's just me. And yes, the Government does warn it's citizens about the dangers of unhealthy food. It's just unlike those other countries, we are less educated come health, exercise less, and "we" see any kind of steps by government to ensure a health citizenry, a encroachment on our "freedums". RFK, conspiracy theories and all, isn't going anywhere. If your boss isn't down with your ideas, your ideas aren't going anywhere. The first time RFK makes any kind of moves to restrict the process out of process foods, some Trump donating CEO is going to beeline down to Mar A Largo, and complain how much it cost them; and that will be that. And oh yeah, you still with have the "what about my freedums" crowd.

 

[Laodicean60]

No, you do not have absolute free speech.

and this is why the thread. The government has no right to hide information from the public. Peace out

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

and this is why the thread. The government has no right to hide information from the public. Peace out

They absolutely do, though. You think you're entitled to all information the government is privy to? You would be very wrong.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

and this is why the thread. The government has no right to hide information from the public. Peace out

Personally, I think we should post the nuclear launch codes and the identities of all CIA agents daily. Can't have the government hiding anything, after all.

 

[HARK!]

Personally, I think we should post the nuclear launch codes

Personally I think that Biden might have forgotten them; otherwise we might have all been dead by now.

 

[Say it aint so]

and this is why the thread. The government has no right to hide information from the public. Peace out

It's not. It advises social media and they make the decision.

 

[Say it aint so]

Personally I think that Biden might have forgotten them; otherwise we might have all been dead by now.

I'm sure Trump probably blabbed them out during one of his narcissistic sessions at Mar A Largo. Just like he did with the Nuke Sub secrets. But then again, just like some intel, they may have just kept it from him knowing he would.