“[T]he great majority of leaked information — the lifeblood of investigative journalism — is anonymous. Often, like in the cases of Edward Snowden, Chelsea Manning or Reality Winner, whistleblowers face serious consequences if their names become attached to documents exposing government or corporate malfeasance. But without a name to go with a document, the difference between leaked data and hacked data is impossible to define. Thus, powerful people and organizations could claim data was hacked, rather than leaked, and simply block all discussion of the matter on the platform.”https://twitter.com/couragefound/status/1294401038968066057 So this in and of itself is an outrage. But the way things are playing out it could wind up being a lot worse if damning information about a candidate surfaces prior to the November election. We already know from experience that social media giants tend to follow in each other’s footsteps whenever there’s a significant step in the direction of censorship, like their coordinated cross-platform removals of alternative media outlets, accounts from US-targeted nations, and people who have been labeled “conspiracy theorists“. So there’s already reason to be concerned that YouTube’s new attack on press freedoms will spread to social media outlets like Twitter and Facebook. Add in the fact that these platforms are openly coordinating with each other and with the US government to silence speech deemed “online meddling” and “election interference” and it looks a lot more likely. The New York Times published an article on Wednesday titled “Google, Facebook and Others Form Tech Coalition to Secure U.S. Election”, later changed to “Google, Facebook and Others Broaden Group to Secure U.S. Election”.
“Facebook, Google and other major tech companies said on Wednesday that they had added new partners and met with government agencies in their efforts to secure the November election,” NYT reports. “The group, which is seeking to prevent the kind of online meddling and foreign interference that sullied the 2016 presidential election, previously consisted of some of the large social media firms, including Twitter and Microsoft in addition to Facebook and Google. Among the new participants is the Wikimedia Foundation.”
https://twitter.com/caitoz/status/1293723634381369345 So if information emerges about a candidate in an “October surprise” in a way that can be credibly spun as a “hack” like the 2016 WikiLeaks drops were, it’s entirely likely that we will see some interference in people’s ability to communicate about it on not just one but multiple social media platforms. How much communication interference we’d be subjected to is unknown at this time, but it certainly looks like there are measures in place to at least implement some under certain circumstances. Imagine if documents or video footage were posted online somewhere and we’d get blocked from sharing its URLs on Facebook or suspended for posting screenshots of it on Twitter. The way iron-fisted censorship practices are already unfolding, it’s a possibility that looks not at all remote. Anyway, something to be on alert for. Read more at: CaitlinJohnstone.comTwitter waging censorship warfare against corporations that supported Trump
By Ethan Huff // Share
Many “journalists” today are just tattletale thought police
By Ethan Huff // Share
Chinese police violently disperse peaceful protesters in Chengdu
By Arsenio Toledo // Share
BOMBSHELL: Media, big business, and political establishment colluded to rig 2020 election
By News Editors // Share
RIOTS erupt in Italy after Rome rejects Palestinian statehood
By ramontomeydw // Share
Israel intensifies its offensive in Gaza City amid global outcry
By kevinhughes // Share
Microplastics found in women's follicular fluid and men's seminal fluid
By patricklewis // Share
Echoes of Exodus: Does an Egyptian papyrus describe the biblical plagues?
By avagrace // Share
Survival priorities: How to stay alive when SHTF using the Rule of Threes
By dominguez // Share