During the massacre of mosque-goers in Christchurch New Zealand one of the shooters made a live video with something like a GoPro camera and it was streamed online. It made its way to social media outlets such as Facebook and Youtube before a mob of media companies and news agencies castigated the social media platforms for carrying it. The video was deleted from the social media sites and is very difficult to find.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/live-video-of-new-zealand-mosque-shooting-dodges-social-media-safeguards-11552657931
There are a million ways media and the corporate world track people and their personal business these days through technology, and the 1% own most of the media, so what is inconvenient for corporate goals tends to become marginalized if not censored outright. Deleting history is offensive to those interested in learning and observing for themselves what is what about social events, crimes, etc. Video crimes captured online cannot be allowed to become live entertainment, so it is reasonable to take down live feeds, yet the content should go up into social media after a suitable time has passed- perhaps 30 days, in order for the content to become part of the historical record the public has a right to know.
Social media sites themselves presently are being neutered by the left, and blamed for ads by foreigners that influence American voters, blamed for allowing 'right wing extremists' to post material, and sundry other special crimes or misdemeanors that invade the privacy of users. Governing powers have no concern about conserving the integrity and existence of material posted by writers and image creators to the corporate media that tends to be unreliable in the long run.
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/03/zuckerberg-facebook-will-shift-focus-to-private-networks-instead-of-open-ones/
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/11/facebook-removes-elizabeth-warren-ads-1216757
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/07/facebook-privacy-domination
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/4/10/17208322/facebook-mark-zuckerberg-congress-testimony-regulation
I understand that Muslim jihadists post video of people they execute; sometimes with heads being cut off. That material is offensive yet is also part of the historical record. The New Zealand mosque shooting should become archival material at least on Youtube within 30 days.
Corporate owned social media has taken down popular shows on social media such as Prison Planet by Alex Jones, who hasn't killed anyone, simply for offending the left. He was subject to a lawsuit by Sandy Hook people, yet a civil suit or even criminal charges should not be enough to prompt censorship and deletion by Corporate from social media. If one were convicted and in prison, then one could not be available for creating content.
Apparently offending the left is enough to make individuals lose social media rights in the way convicts lose their voting rights in several states. The United States cannot have a free society if people are not free to criticize the government and corporations including media corporations, and free to criticize the 1% for owning the media, and corporations for promoting wrong value theories such that develop Mussolini's philosophy of corporatism in the United States as an actual political fact. The spineless Democrat Party passed Bush II tax cuts permanently to reinforce the concept of the deep state of Republocratic government interested in making pets of the citizens. If they actually wanted to revolt the corporate social media would be sure to censor everything and call it hate speech. That would be especially true if people were to say they hate the government, they hate the media and they hate the 1%. One cannot express a revolutionary level of hate; even if it is deserved, without incurring the wrath of the social media queer minders and their media stooges.
Logicians may not actually experience an emotion rising to the level of hate when realizing the deep inefficiencies of the U.S. Government and the way the corporate system has evolved in the United States. It is needful to leave real content including the unpleasant and offensive, when it becomes part of public history, in the public realm where it to can be considered in understanding who and what actual people have done.
One wants to know if their political leaders and fellow citizens are as daft as they appear in such cases. One might want to know if people perpetrating various crimes for political reasons fit into their social environment in very unusual ways. What one doesn't want is propaganda alone, and the media point of view that is a device the very rich prefer the public to receive.
The left with their corporate leash holders have made hate a symbolic sign for everything antipathetic to their political agenda. It is another Orwellian step too far.
There are a million ways media and the corporate world track people and their personal business these days through technology, and the 1% own most of the media, so what is inconvenient for corporate goals tends to become marginalized if not censored outright. Deleting history is offensive to those interested in learning and observing for themselves what is what about social events, crimes, etc. Video crimes captured online cannot be allowed to become live entertainment, so it is reasonable to take down live feeds, yet the content should go up into social media after a suitable time has passed- perhaps 30 days, in order for the content to become part of the historical record the public has a right to know.
Social media sites themselves presently are being neutered by the left, and blamed for ads by foreigners that influence American voters, blamed for allowing 'right wing extremists' to post material, and sundry other special crimes or misdemeanors that invade the privacy of users. Governing powers have no concern about conserving the integrity and existence of material posted by writers and image creators to the corporate media that tends to be unreliable in the long run.
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/03/zuckerberg-facebook-will-shift-focus-to-private-networks-instead-of-open-ones/
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/11/facebook-removes-elizabeth-warren-ads-1216757
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/07/facebook-privacy-domination
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/4/10/17208322/facebook-mark-zuckerberg-congress-testimony-regulation
I understand that Muslim jihadists post video of people they execute; sometimes with heads being cut off. That material is offensive yet is also part of the historical record. The New Zealand mosque shooting should become archival material at least on Youtube within 30 days.
Corporate owned social media has taken down popular shows on social media such as Prison Planet by Alex Jones, who hasn't killed anyone, simply for offending the left. He was subject to a lawsuit by Sandy Hook people, yet a civil suit or even criminal charges should not be enough to prompt censorship and deletion by Corporate from social media. If one were convicted and in prison, then one could not be available for creating content.
Apparently offending the left is enough to make individuals lose social media rights in the way convicts lose their voting rights in several states. The United States cannot have a free society if people are not free to criticize the government and corporations including media corporations, and free to criticize the 1% for owning the media, and corporations for promoting wrong value theories such that develop Mussolini's philosophy of corporatism in the United States as an actual political fact. The spineless Democrat Party passed Bush II tax cuts permanently to reinforce the concept of the deep state of Republocratic government interested in making pets of the citizens. If they actually wanted to revolt the corporate social media would be sure to censor everything and call it hate speech. That would be especially true if people were to say they hate the government, they hate the media and they hate the 1%. One cannot express a revolutionary level of hate; even if it is deserved, without incurring the wrath of the social media queer minders and their media stooges.
Logicians may not actually experience an emotion rising to the level of hate when realizing the deep inefficiencies of the U.S. Government and the way the corporate system has evolved in the United States. It is needful to leave real content including the unpleasant and offensive, when it becomes part of public history, in the public realm where it to can be considered in understanding who and what actual people have done.
One wants to know if their political leaders and fellow citizens are as daft as they appear in such cases. One might want to know if people perpetrating various crimes for political reasons fit into their social environment in very unusual ways. What one doesn't want is propaganda alone, and the media point of view that is a device the very rich prefer the public to receive.
The left with their corporate leash holders have made hate a symbolic sign for everything antipathetic to their political agenda. It is another Orwellian step too far.
No comments:
Post a Comment