After the mainstream media took some que from a silent hand to suddenly report on Facebook’s data collection policies as the Cambridge Analytica scandal purposefully spilled into the public’s perception, now the agenda behind such willingness to report on the misdeeds of Facebook is becoming more apparent.
As Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg testified before the Senate this week, the focus of the hearing slowly became more about censorship of content on Facebook than the corporation taking people’s data and doing bad things with it.
Since when did the topic at hand become about controversial content on Facebook? We all know they are referring to media that is critical of the government, or critical of any power clique that is capable of extending its influence to Facebook and what it chooses to censor and promote.
People thought Facebook would get hung out to dry for collecting data on people, by an agency of the government that collects the very most data of all and gets it from Facebook? People shouldn’t hold their breath.
The only honest and valuable thing to do in decoding this exchange is to see through to the hidden motives. In the hearing, Republican Senator John Cornyn from Texas asked Zuckerberg “We’ve been told that platforms like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and the like are neutral platforms, and the people who own and run them for profit … bore no responsibility for the content. Do you agree now that Facebook and other social media platforms are not neutral platforms but bear some responsibility for the content?”
Zuckerberg responded “I agree that we’re responsible for content.”
It’s very odd that Zuckerberg took such a legal leap off a cliff and suggested that Facebook is responsible for the content of its site as if it is not a “platform.” All kinds of liabilities may accompany a person who publishes content, from copyright violation issues, to slander, if they are the publishers. However on a platform, a place where everybody shares content that has already been created, the platform can never be held accountable for what free users post to the platform.
It has even been said that this admission could cost him his company. However it will not, because he is complying with what they want: and what they want is for certain content to be censored. As the war in Syria becomes worse, somebody probably wants the ability to censor things with greater power.
There’s a problem that the wealthy and powerful who seem to be exerting an influence on Facebook need to solve. Their problem is that due to the power of independent researchers, alternative media operating with the help of Facebook, and this entire new wave of publishers, the propaganda that rings throughout the television news media is losing potency.
To preserve the power of that dying monopoly on news, they had to invent the term “fake news” at the end of 2016. Now this Facebook hearing is suddenly not about unwarranted data collection, but basically the fact that dissenting publishers from the mainstream narrative are becoming too powerful. They talk about terrorists recruiting people and things like that as the reason for censorship, but common sense tells us they are not the intended target.
Make no mistake about it: the end goal of these efforts of the mainstream media to place Facebook in the spotlight are headed toward something fishy, and most likely an agenda of censorship. They are headed for an agenda of censorship of content creators and publishers who deliver a dissenting opinion in contrast to the mainstream one.
If the info those targeted new independent content creators published wasn’t true, it wouldn’t be a threat.
People who have tried to elevate themselves to public figures are steering things in the direction of left versus right, looking suspiciously like they are purposefully trying to agitate division: I’m talking about Paul Joseph Watson.
Now he defends conservatives and pretends that they are the only ones being censored on Facebook. Someone is in his pockets: it’s not about left or right, both sides have many things wrong and hardly a few things correct.
This is the air of confusion somebody is trying to place us in while on the other side of the world, innocent men, women, and children die and suffer at the hands of what is coldly referred to as “foreign policy”: and since they are seemingly about to make some moves in Syria, they need our attention elsewhere.