"No One Else Can See Your Post"
I was one of the millions of people whose free speech rights were violated
“Your Post Goes Against Our Community Standards So Only You Can See It”
[Update: 8/5/23 - Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. just filed a lawsuit against Google for violations of free speech rights. Read the lawsuit and watch the RFK, Jr. speech that Google took down from YouTube.
Prior to that, a federal District Court judge issued an opinion that documented widespread, systemic government censorship. Read the opinion too. ~~~ end update]
It is shameful that I have to begin by noting this, but anyone who knows me or reads what I write knows that I am not a science denier, racist, anti-semite, homophobic, misogynist, anti-trans, anti-vaxer, MAGA Trumper, Putin puppet, violent extremist, Fascist, et al. or distributor of disinformation, misinformation, libels, or any other intentional and/or malicious falsehoods or smears. This is all irrelevant anyway.
(if the government has now defined a whole new concept of “malinformation” as information that deviates from government diktat or criticizes government policy, then I am proud to be a distributor of “malinformation”)
So, let me say that I was appalled by how the Democrats in Congress just defended the indefensible, at yesterday’s House hearing on blatant censorship by the federal government (the hearing behavior was actually worse than the Democrats' letter prior to the hearing).
I’d also like to go on record to document that I was one of the millions of Americans whose First Amendment rights were infringed upon and violated by the federal government.
The above post is clear evidence of that.
On January 8, 2021, I posted the photo above of myself and a group of environmental leaders from NJ on the Capitol steps. This group was selected and honored by Congressman Rush Holt (who signed the photo FB took down).
It was suppressed by Facebook.
At the time, I was not aware of the fact that Facebook’s rationale or motives to intentionally censor speech were at the direction of and under the coercion of the federal government. I now know that.
My intent was exactly the opposite of what I assume Facebook and the government’s intent was.
But my intent is irrelevant.
It was blatant and intolerable censorship. Period.
The crucial factor is the interplay of governmental and private action, for it is only after the initial exertion of state power represented by the production order that private action takes hold. ~~~ US Supreme Court, NAACP v. Alabama (1958)
Welcome to the club, though I can't say that misery loves company. I'd rather be the only one who is experiencing such blatant censorship for printing nothing more controversial than the facts. And you're quite right about one of the sadder aspects of it: the Party that once was counted on as a defender of civil rights is now the biggest promoter of censorship and 'narrative control'.
Content moderation is a must. I used to be on Usenet, the first social medium. Unmoderated, it was gradually ruined by trolls, nuts, and assholes saturating the place with their shit. No decent person could tolerate it. We all left. Last time I looked the trolls, nuts, and assholes were still going at it.
The question is, how much moderation is too much? If a private company decides all pro-Trump commentary is hurting their profits, shouldn't they have a right to ban it? Hard to say, a real tradeoff there. My humble suggestion is that if a company decides to shadowban or throttle you then they must tell you. In short, they have to risk losing your business instead of duping you into believing they are providing a service.
On the other hand, government participation in this is unacceptable. It's just a fig leaf over a Ministry of Truth. The sneaky way they went about it shows that they know it isn't OK. Since they haven't a leg to stand on in the law their defense consists entirely on attacking the character of those who dared expose this. It wouldn't be so bad if they were actually promoting truth, but instead they just want to give the weird D and R cults a duopoly on misinformation. They know that in a free market they will lose. It had nothing to do with boosting social media's profits, indeed surely hurt them through customers lost.
For years Youtube relentlessly exposed me to weird fringe cult belief systems. I suppose that maximized profit. If you get hooked on a weird cult then you can only feed your addiction through Youtube, so the customer is locked in. Then Zuck got hauled before Congress. Five times. Now Google insists on feeding me big money post-truth mainstream cult media. Not any better.
I could go on.....