Tag: Censorship

Member Post

 

I was reading Bari Weiss’ announcement of a new organization called Fair that is going to try and fight back against cancel culture and she linked to a fascinating article by Abagaik Shrier entitled Book Banning in an Age of Amazon She had a wonderful quote that I think is amazing and you should all […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

On this episode of “The Federalist Radio Hour,” President of the Ethics and Public Policy Center Ryan T. Anderson joins Culture Editor Emily Jashinsky to discuss Amazon’s recent attempt to deplatform his book “When Harry Became Sally: Responding to the Transgender Moment.”

Censorship & “Beyond Their Reach”

 

The older I become, the more I find that I squirm with embarrassment whenever I read the Ten Commandments. It’s not that I’m embarrassed by prohibitions or injunctions but, rather, I’m embarrassed that God found it necessary to give these particular ones. We generally give instructions to others based on our perception of their weaknesses and proclivities. And I can only conclude that God’s instructions reflect His understanding of the kind of people we are.

The prohibition against “graven images” suggests that mankind has a tendency to elevate and admire the works of his own hands over the God who made those hands to begin with. Centuries later, the apostle Paul made this explicit in his letter to the Romans when he described man as having “worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator”. So mankind apparently has an unhealthy tendency to overestimate the value of its own innovations. Peachy.

The Freedom Seed Vault

 

By Subiet – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=92970583
On the cold and inhospitable little Norwegian island of Spitsbergen is an oddly photogenic structure, the Svalbard Global Seed Vault. This austere yet visually striking underground storage facility is intended to secure the world’s agricultural future in the event that some barely imaginable catastrophe threatens it.

I don’t worry much about mass extinctions, v I certainly don’t worry about climate change. And I live way up north, in one of those growth zones where only fence posts, cows, and a few lichens really thrive, so I’m accustomed to plants that scoff at adversity and power on through.

On this episode of “The Federalist Radio Hour,” Senior Editor Christopher Bedford interviews Rachel Bovard of the Conservative Partnership Institute about the right’s uphill battle against Big Tech, censorship, shadowbanning, and de-platforming.

On this episode of The Federalist Radio Hour, PragerU’s Chief Marketing Officer Craig Strazzeri joins Culture Editor Emily Jashinsky to outline how the organization is navigating and battling the censorship challenges presented by big tech companies such as YouTube and Facebook in their efforts to promote educational, conservative digital content.

QotD: From Sharyl Attkisson on Censorship

 

Saw this and thought of many of us:

When you see news outlets, “fact checkers,” Internet companies, and others working hard to keep you from seeing or believing something; or controversializing a news outlet, reporter, or other person; use that as a cue to understand that the item/fact/study at issue may actually be true and worthy of further inquiry on your part. The attention giving to censor or controversialize typically signals that powerful interests are trying to hide something or attempting to further a narrative that may be false.

Altered Images: Colorization

 

About thirty-five years ago the top bosses of my then-employer, the American Film Institute, got us into a real jam with our funders. Taking a stiff-necked, self-righteous pose, AFI impulsively issued strong statements and held an urgent press conference in support of a new artists’ rights movement headed by longtime board members and all-around AFI pals Steven Spielberg and George Lucas. Saying yes to them must have seemed like a no-brainer. What, after all, could be controversial in 1980’s Hollywood about backing Steven and George? And they had allies; the film directors’ guild, as well as groups of film critics and other intellectuals, were coming out in force against a new media technology that they sternly called a mortal threat to America’s film heritage.

The new technique, supposedly so dangerous to preserving American culture on screen, was called colorization, using video technology to allow hand-coloring of black-and-white films and TV shows. In retrospect, it was one of the most overblown film controversies of the mid-Eighties. But the way it worked out set business precedents that still guide media law to this day, and shape the battleground over censorship and online cancel culture. Withdrawing Song of the South from general circulation, or turning police guns into walkie-talkies in E.T., cutting a Donald Trump cameo appearance out of Home Alone 2 or removing Kevin Spacey from All the Money in the World, —they were all affected by what happened in courtrooms and offices in the nearly-forgotten Colorization War of now-distant 1986.

Parler, Web Hosts, and Masterpiece Cakes

 

Parler lost its rented server space with Amazon Web Services. Parler also found its phone apps booted off the Apple and Google app stores. This is not the “destruction” of Parler – not unless Parler was on such shaky ground that it cannot be rebuilt. This is certainly hamstringing it, but if this is a “death sentence”, then it is one that is easily overcome with cold hard cash (would that the Reaper were so easily fended off on more fleshly concerns). We need perspective here, and an honest reckoning of what happened, how, and why. We also need to yet again yank the plank from our own eye, for it was just a short while ago that we were adamantly defending another business for refusing paying clientele: I speak of none other than Masterpiece Cakes.

First, let’s get the technical stuff out of the way – understanding how Parler was built, and how it planned to make money for its creators (let’s not fool ourselves into thinking it was all charity work) is key to understanding its demise. Web sites have to be located on computers. You can make a website on your laptop and share it with the rest of the internet if you want. Users just would need to know the numerical address in either IPV4 or IPV6 to find it. If you want to make it easier to find then you would have to register a domain name, and then map that domain name to your server address. Now suppose your little website got really popular because its topic was fun and lovable – let’s say, for the sake of argument, that your website was all about your pet bird. If you had just a residential internet connection, after a point your neighbors would start to complain that traffic to your laptop was killing their own connections. Plus, your laptop has limited processing power to keep serving page views out – and your addition of a little bird forum doubled traffic to the point where your laptop’s cooling fan failed from overuse. How do you fix these issues?

Member Post

 

So after Twitter bans President Trump, Parler suddenly becomes the most-downloaded mobile phone application — prompting Apple, Google, and Amazon to conspire* to shut down Parler. I’ve never thought of myself as a populist, but, by golly, I’m there. We’re witnessing the rise of the machines. Figuratively speaking. Preview Open

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Member Post

 

I dropped FB and switched to Parler but didn’t see this coming,… He added, “Apparently they believe Parler is responsible for ALL user generated content on Parler. Therefor by the same logic, Apple must be responsible for ALL actions taken by their phones. Every car bomb, every illegal cell phone conversation, every illegal crime committed […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Speak Out in 2021

 

As the train wreck of 2020 steams full speed into what we have every reason to expect will be the train wreck of 2021, I’ve been thinking about how I want to apply my limited time and energy in the new year. There are certainly plenty of issues that warrant attention. After all, no problems that dogged us last year have been solved; none has even grown smaller, and a brand new set of problems is scheduled to take office in just a couple of weeks, promising a tsunami of bad judgment and its inevitable consequences.

I’ve resolved to do my best to focus most of my attention on one issue, something I consider to be of paramount importance; more important even than our foolish panic over COVID, or the frankly idiotic trans movement, or the viciousness of Antifa and hateful dishonesty of BLM, or the barely concealed self-loathing of climate catastrophism.

Member Post

 

I’m one of those keep browser tabs open forever people, believing that I’ll eventually read that article, watch that video, or look up that band or song. The tab for this interview has been open (restoring my previous tabs whenever I restart my laptop) since April, and I finally watched this video today. This interview, […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Ep. 270 – Jeff Brain, CEO & Founder at CloutHub discusses how social media Tech Titans Facebook and Twitter used censorship to impact the Presidential Election. What is the future for the platforms, will Trump achieve changes for Section 230, and what does the future for Social Media look like with new platforms like CloutHub coming on strong.

Member Post

 

Alan Dershowitz and Joel Pollak discuss Pollak’s new book about the election, YouTube censorship, and the blacklisting of opposing viewpoints in academic circles. As you might expect, Dershowitz does a lot of the talking. Then again, Pollak is his former student, and Pollak does change the Professor’s opinion on at least one thing. A refreshing […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Member Post

 

Much has been said about the frustration of those who believe the elections resulted in fraudulent results, and the response of the editors and managers to the resulting posts. Rather than debate the specifics of the arguments on both sides, I’m proposing a different way to study the ensuing controversies: members’ posts about fraudulent elections […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Member Post

 

I’d be interested to hear anyone’s thoughts about this. By virtue of their market dominance and the competitive advantages of large networks, the tech giants are able to manage the flow of news and information, censoring, throttling, and editorializing as they wish. They can do this transparently or invisibly, using increasingly sophisticated algorithms coupled with […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Compulsion to Conform

 

Millions of words have been written about the current state of the country. Those of us who write (and those who follow our work) have been analyzing how we got to this vicious and primitive time. One key point that has been overlooked is that we have given up our commitment to the individual and free speech, and are now pandering to a New Tribe. I’d like to suggest one idea that came out of my own pondering of our circumstances and see what you think. By the way, this applies to the greater society as well as specifically Congress.

* * * * *

Human beings formed into tribes as far back as we can go into human history. The nature of the tribes may have varied, but the one thing they probably had in common were rules for acceptable behavior and actions. The importance of those rules in each tribe might have varied, but most tribes probably rated certain rules as extremely important to the survival and protection of the tribe. Children were taught them at the time of their birth. And everyone knew that if specific critical rules were broken, the punishment was to be expelled from the tribe. Due to the seriousness of the punishment, people understood the importance of complying. Otherwise, ejection meant not only isolation, but more than likely certain death due to other enemy tribes or to wild animals. As a result, conforming to tribal law was not only a high priority, but was a matter of survival.