In the video below, Vin Armani gives an update about YouTube and Facebook’s latest attempt to censor content on their platforms. He discusses a brand new Facebook tool to further censor conspiracy theories, and misleading and sensational content. Well, that’s subjective.
Facebook posted a press release to announce the new tool, writing:
We want to help people build an informed community on Facebook. That’s why we’re always working to understand which posts people consider misleading, sensational and spammy so we can show fewer of those and show more informative posts instead.
We hear from our community that they’re disappointed when they click on a link that leads to a web page containing little substantive content and that is covered in disruptive, shocking or malicious ads. People expect their experience after clicking on a post to be straightforward.
Starting today, we’re rolling out an update so people see fewer posts and ads in News Feed that link to these low-quality web page experiences. Similar to the work we’re already doing to stop misinformation, this update will help reduce the economic incentives of financially-motivated spammers.
What does Google have in common with traditionally liberal news networks like MSNBC, ABC and CNN? On the surface, nothing much at all – the former is an Internet search engine and the latter are a couple of national broadcasting corporations with political hosts and commentators. If you dig a little deeper, however, it becomes clear that both the search engine and the liberal news networks have something in common after all, and it has to do with a vicious assault on the freedom of speech.
The Internet search engine’s fight against fake news was first confirmed in a BBC News interview with Google’s chief executive, Sundar Pichai, just days after the presidential election. “There have been a couple of incidences where… we didn’t get it right,” Pichai explained, referring to the spread of fake news across the search engine platform. “It is a learning moment for us and we will definitely work to fix it.”
Like adding fuel to a raging fire, the mainstream media indirectly assists Google in the quest to purge fake news from the Internet by constantly talking about it. If you think about it, the term “fake news” was really first introduced by the media and certain cable news networks during the presidential election. Even today, they continue to urge all of us to be wary of fake news, and insist that something must be done to curtail it. In this way, the media and Google work together as a machine, of sorts, with liberal networks providing the fuel and Google turning the gears.
While the spread of false information is certainly not something that should be encouraged, the real problem here is how one defines fake news, and who is defining it. Indeed, what may be considered fake news to a liberal may be considered real and legitimate to someone who is more conservative. When Google says that it is going to begin flagging articles that appear in search results and label them as either true or false, the immediate questions that should be asked are, one, what methods are used in their fact checking, and two, who specifically is verifying the information behind closed doors?
The thing about progressivism is that it works in a very slow, incremental fashion. While today liberals and Google may claim to only be targeting fringe websites such as white nationalist blogs or articles advocating anti-Semitism, tomorrow they could very well be targeting more traditional sites like the right-leaning Breitbart.com, Conservative Review or Fox News.
As any constitutionalist or liberty-loving American will tell you, this is absolutely an assault on the freedom of speech. Google and the mainstream media have essentially worked together to set in motion a national constitutional crisis, which they will continue to tell us is in our best interest because after all, they’re only trying to make sure that you get factual information. This is how modern day liberals operate – by telling us that all of these changes are for the good of the people, when in reality they are nothing but detrimental.
Perhaps we should begin calling Google “fake search,” since they seem to be so interested in purging the Internet of anything that is false or illegitimate.
New court documents allege that Monsanto is employing an army of internet trolls to literally “Let Nothing Go”–no article, no comment, no social media post is to be left unanswered by these third party proxies. Find out about the court case from which these documents have emerged, the history and context of the accusations, and what it all means in today’s thought for the day.
The New York Times, as Robert Parry has pointed out, «Cheers the Rise of Censorship», but only of censorship of any allegations that expose the fraudulence of the NYT’s allegations. The Washington Post, Google, the TV networks, and practically all of the famous providers of ‘news’, have joined forces in order to block from the internet any statements that contradict, or especially any evidence that disproves, what they collectively define to be ’true’; and, while they do this, they add a lie, that their sole aim in doing this rigging of web-search results is to prevent ‘misinformation’ from polluting your mind. They use as an excuse the existence of some flagrantly fabricated reports on obscure websites, but if the mainstream press can ban reports such as those, then they can also ban real news reports, which expose the mainstream’s own lies. In other words: they are implementing their collective power to block you from being able to know that they’re systematically lying. Will the public trust them with this power?
Parry says that if this effort by them is allowed to proceed, then we shall be fully in the Brave New World, of 1984 — and, of course, he is correct in that, which means that everyone should unsubscribe and not pay a cent to all of the ’news’ media that are trying to block the public from having access to evidence and allegations that contradict what these bullies in the ‘news’ media pump as being their mutually-agreed-upon ‘truth’.
Is this a religion that they’re proselytizing, or is it the press in a democracy? Is what these people are trying to impose, upon the public, in accord with the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution? Consider the Amendment carefully:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
There is no «free exercise» at all, if this religion — this faith in the infallibility of some allegedly inerrant scripture (in this case: whatever these ’news’media are saying) — is being imposed. Is the First Amendment intended to protect the right of the owners of the press, these people who own the media; or is it instead intended to protect the right of the public to have access to all sides of every public issue so that they will be able to vote in elections in an honestly informed way, which may have some falsehoods in it (because perfection does not exist in any societal enterprise), but which has been selected by each voter instead of imposed upon the voter (canonized as ‘holy scripture’, even if not overtly alleged to be such)? And, is this «the press» intended to be some portion of the press, that is somehow rightfully empowered to crush all the rest? Is what America’s mainstream ‘news’media are trying to do here, not only a flagrant violation of their most solemn responsibility to the public whom they are supposed to be serving, but also a form of real treachery against the nation itself?
What happens if a portion of the press bullies the rest of the press and blocks their ability to report ‘inconvenient truths’? (This is what’s now being put into place, by the effort to prevent discordant allegations and evidence from being carried on the internet.) If Congress were to pass a law to prohibit that bullying, would doing this support the aim and spirit of the First Amendment, or instead violate it? You decide — and then, once you decide, maybe contact your Senators and Representative to outlaw any such bullying. How many politicians would allege that the First Amendment protects the right of some media-owners to block news-reports from other media-owners? It wouldn’t fly.
They want you not to know that they are lying when they allege that clear and convincing evidence has been presented that Bashar al-Assad perpetrated a sarin gas attack on April 4th — and not to know that President Trump was lying when he bombed Syria saying that clear evidence had been presented to him showing this to have been proven.
They want you not to know that Obama’s sanctions against Russia for accepting Crimea back into Russia, of which Crimea had been for hundreds of years a part until the Soviet dictator arbitrarily transferred it to Ukraine in 1954, are punishing Russia when the actual villain in the entire affair was Obama himself.
They want to force you to believe what they publish to be reality, and that what you are reading here and in the linked-to sources here, is merely ‘fake news’. If it is news of any type, it is real history, because those media-bullies didn’t report it when it was news. Instead, they hid it from you. Now, after-the-fact, it has become history, but when it was news, it was being hidden from you, and they would have called it ‘fake news’ if they had mentioned it at all.
Do you trust those ‘news’ media? If so, why? And what will be the end-result of their success in what they are doing, if not World War III and nuclear annihilation?
Some of them (such as «Democracy Now!») pretend to be ‘progressive’, even while pumping lies for the aristocracy. Their audience are deceived into thinking that the main source of funding for such sites is these poor idealists themselves, so they donate, not imagining that billionaires are actually the main funding-source behind such ‘news’ sites.
The aristocrats who got Hitler into power were no more obsessed to control the world than are America’s aristocracy today; and, this time, the results could be even worse.
This is deadly serious. But to America’s aristocrats, it’s only a game that they are dead-set on ‘winning’.
FULL DISCLOSURE: Google has threatened at least one of my publishers, which depressed him, but he ultimately decided that truth is more important than ‘success’.
(Natural News) I recently published a rare interview with the founder of SGT Report, a popular independent media website that’s also featured on Censored.news. The topic of our discussion? Google’s “cheating” of its search algorithm to artificially penalize indy media websites, and YouTube’s demonetization assault on the independent media, now dubbed the “Adpocalypse.”
I quietly released the interview a couple of days ago (video below), and since then I keep hearing from people about how “powerful” the interview was, and why it gave them hope for the future of freedom of information across the ‘net. Unknown to me at the time, the person I was interviewing brought up something I hadn’t planned on making public, but since it’s now out there, I have no problem acknowledging it: YES, I have been financially supporting several smaller publishers by purchasing ad space on their websites as a means of helping to keep them financially afloat. (See details below.)
I’m looking to help more small publishers earn even more revenues, and we now have a solid revenue model through our online store affiliate system, which is earning real revenues for many publishers. If you’re reading this and want to add our affiliate revenue generation to your publishing site, just email us at “affiliate” at the domain HealthRangerStore.com to learn more details.
I’ve included the full video below, plus a few paragraphs of what All News Pipeline wrote about the interview. ANP is a very important independent media website that has done remarkable investigatory work and has suffered through its own attacks, smears and DDoS hacking waves. Like all of us in the independent media, ANP was built by resilient, determined SURVIVORS who have both the courage and the intellect to make enormous contributions to public knowledge through the practice of legitimate investigative journalism.
Here’s what they had to say about all this (video below):
Interestingly, as the MSM see each other as “competition,” and the Independent Media as “enemies to be destroyed,” those in the Independent Media that simply have an alternate point of view, willing to highlight things the MSM refuse to address or report on, view the Internet as big enough for everyone and have started to fight back against the attacks against us all.
There are people that have been in the Independent Media business far longer than many of us, such as Steve Quayle, that links to well researched, informative articles from Independent News websites, helping to negate the censorship practices by Google and YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and others.
…Then you have people like Mike Adams, from Natural News, who has been attacked by Google when they literally removed over 140,000 pages of his website from Google search engines with bogus excuses, not only highlighting the issue, but then despite his own personal loss of massive revenue, has continued to fight and highlight the war against Independent Media.
Now let me tell you something Adams did not highlight in that post, probably because he didn’t want to toot his own horn, so to speak. Mike Adams has also been placing ads on younger sites that have been attacked, demonetized and censored, in order to help support them.
As can be heard in the interview below, where Adams speaks to SGT Report founder about censorship, who begins by informing listeners that Adams “stepped up, after you found out about our YouTube demonetization problems which hit in an incredibly powerful and dramatic way on March 31st, they literally turned off our advertising opportunities and shut down revenue, 95% of it, and its really remained that way ever since… and you stepped up out of nowhere to email and say you’d love to place an ad at SGT Report to support us. I just want people to understand how generous you are. You offered to pay two to three times market value……”
Adams, unaware that SGT Report founder was going to bring that up, admitted to quietly helping smaller Independent publishers behind the scenes saying he would continue to do so, basically as pushback against the corporate controlled system and the attacks against Independent Media.
ANP can attest and confirm from personal experience, what SGT Report founder stated, as days after Adams published his piece on the attacks and demonetization issues, we too received an email about placing an ad on our site, which you can see in the sidebar right now. Since we had communicated with Mike previously, linking to each other in areas where article content matched, we offered a colleague discount on placing the ad, to which his representative refused, and insisted on paying more than we quoted them, because the point was to “support” ANP.
Adams, like Quayle, who always and generously will take the time to answer questions and offer guidance, are actively helping fight back against the attacks, specifically helping those that are newer to the business, less established, and therefore more vulnerable to those attacks.
We are witnessing pioneers of Independent Media standing up actively helping newer members, something you will never see the establishment media do.
Listen below as The Health Ranger interviews the founder of the SGTreport (SGTreport.com) about the mainstream media’s attempts to destroy the independent media.
Comment: What YouTube has been doing is despicable. Remember this video when the next eejit says we have free press and freedom of speech in this ignominious corporatocracy. The only hope is for other video sharing outlets to take up the slack that YouTube created. We the people deserve freedom from these bloated corporations.
9 May 2017
It has now become crystal clear that the You Tube ‘Adpocalypse’ is just phase one of a far more sinister plan to sabotage successful You Tube channels in order to kill competition, robber Barron style, so that the corporate, legacy and mainstream media can yield more power, control and eyeballs on You Tube. What’s being done to the SGT Report You Tube channel can be quantified by alarming statistics which prove, the fix is in. As John D. Rockefeller famously boasted, “Competition is a sin.”
In the UK press, however, vaccine injury stories are quite common. What follows here are partial postings from the UK Daily Mail and SWNS.com, a UK-based newswire service. Both of these stories tell the shocking, disturbing stories of young women whose lives have been destroyed by vaccines.
Remember, HPV vaccines are medical violence against women… Any news organization that refuses to cover vaccine injury is helping greedy pharmaceutical corporations exploit the bodies of women for profit.
Teenager’s agony as she is left wheelchair-bound and feeling like an ’80-year-old’ as her parents claim controversial HPV vaccine is to blame