White House admits role in online censorship || Robert Barnes & Matt Orfalea

source

▼▼ Show Description ▼▼


Ads




You might be interested in

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
24 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Alison Morrow
Alison Morrow
4 months ago
Brent Wells
Brent Wells
4 months ago

This administration has crossed the line and it's very scary.

Rob Banks
Rob Banks
4 months ago

Government pushing for censorship and telling companies who and what to censor is a first amendment violation.

heh heh
heh heh
4 months ago

lookup "Christchurch call to action" it's a new Zealand originated censorship Public private commitment and it's why we have no LiveLeak anymore Biden signed us up this year and big tech signed up separately years ago

Charles Lumia
Charles Lumia
4 months ago

Censorship is cancer. This administration hates us and The Constitution.

Sean Gilliam
Sean Gilliam
4 months ago

Facebook is officially state run media, as long as the dems are in charge.

Critical Thinker
Critical Thinker
4 months ago

#Reform.Section.230.

Aris G
Aris G
4 months ago

They first decide if they want to ban you or not, and then they try to find out an excuse

John Pruett
John Pruett
4 months ago

Eventually they're going to intimidate people with a visit from police and possible arrest.

Honey Bee
Honey Bee
4 months ago

Keep the water flowing.
Let the truth flow.

Mike Jacob
Mike Jacob
4 months ago

Stopping the dissemination of "misinformation" is stopping the dissemination of information.
When that is done by or at the request of the government, the first amendment has been violated.

Aris G
Aris G
4 months ago

I'm willing to bet that the reason why they can't always tell you why you got banned is because those types of things are being handled by some sort of neural network-based AI. It's not always possible to tell (as in provide a meaningful rationalization) why a neural network acts the way it does. And on top of that, due to their woke agenda, the way that they train their AIs to enforce all their twisted and nonsensical tenets, they certainly end up being deranged beyond recognition.

If they're not telling you why you got banned, it's often because they don't want to (obviously) but sometimes because they honestly can't. That doesn't excuse them of anything, of course

Alex Newton
Alex Newton
4 months ago

I tried to watch on Odysee but it wasn't there. Had to watch on YT

Sigurður Eysteinsson
Sigurður Eysteinsson
4 months ago

I recently got posts from over a year ago deleted on Facebook, for spreading misinformation which was the statistics from the Icelandic health authorities with the current pandemic numbers at the time.
Apparently the Icelandic health authorities are not a reliable source of information.
I protested, not that I care about those old posts, but I have not had any response.
So, Facebook is just rewriting History it seems.

Ron Petersen
Ron Petersen
4 months ago

I had one of those warnings from Facebook over a joke about a horror movie title. I challenged it and explained the joke which was pretty obvious but they they said they took no actions but had a maybe you didn't realized you were breaking the policies.
For context it was in a movie discussion group about the movie Orphan. The guy couldn't think of the name. So I said the name of the movie was Little Orphan Gonna kill you all. The joke being referencing little orphan Annie and the fact the movie in question was a horror movie. It was super clear I was joking about a movie title.

Eugene Seidel
Eugene Seidel
4 months ago

In Germany, lawyer Joachim Steinhöfel is having success forcing YT through the courts to reinstate channels. In fact, a court last week fined YT 100,000 euros for taking too long to reinstate. There is a ruling by a higher court that constitutionally guaranteed free speech is not limited to defending citizens from state overreach, it also extends to quasi monopoly SM platforms.

Steinhöfel doesn't work cheap, however :/

quantumac
quantumac
4 months ago

Remember when the left used to absolutely adore freedom of speech? Yeah, that's before they went totalitarian. Evidently they like totalitarianism better than free speech.

Rish Panjeet
Rish Panjeet
4 months ago

Executive, Legislative, Judicial, and Big Tech 🤢

SP4NQD
SP4NQD
4 months ago

Barnes doesn't sleep. He's got that Alex Jones energy.

Matt Orfalea
Matt Orfalea
4 months ago

Thank you again. Great conversation. Pleasure meeting Robert too.

James Belkin
James Belkin
4 months ago

You need to get in touch with Dr Shiva Ayyadurai, he is very knowledgeable of what is going on. He is suing the government and twitter, he did all the homework, court filing, and represented himself. The judge, Mark L. Wolf, felt Dr Ayyadurai had such a strong case and appointed him a constitutional lawyer

Romanus Lureaus
Romanus Lureaus
4 months ago

Has this always been the case for the WH regardless of president, or is this exclusive to this administration led by The Most Popular President Ever? This is quite a disgrace and one can only imagine how bad things might turn out in the not-so-distant future.

TJP 81
TJP 81
4 months ago

Maybe we should be grateful that today's central controllers have focused themselves on information instead of economics? But I suspect that the information centralization is a means toward the end of economic centralization.

Universal Soldier
Universal Soldier
4 months ago

The top two killers in the US are heart disease and cancer, which are exacerbated by drinking, smoking, leading a crappy lifestyle, and (I know this is controversial) eating animal products. COVID was third in 2020. Would it then be wise for the government to censor our texts or posts about getting trashed on a Friday, inviting friends to a BBQ, and joking about the all-nighter to prevent our #1 and #2 health crises, which cost us billions every year? Hey, I'm just following the science.

Oh hi there 👋
It’s nice to meet you.

Sign up to for the latest content in your inbox, every week!

We don’t spam! Read our privacy policy for more info.