It's All Much Worse Than I Thought

[Valin]

Public Substack

The corporate media are all-in on government censorship
Michael Shellenberger
Mar 26, 2024

(Note short video at Link)

Over the last three years, we have come to learn of the role that our own government officials have played in demanding censorship by social media platforms. Some of this censorship was overt, particularly as it related to COVID. However, some of it was also done in secrecy, as we discovered in the Twitter Files. Many of us thought that once we had uncovered the censorship, governments would be sufficiently embarrassed to stop doing it. And to some extent, that has been the case.

But now, governments around the world are stepping up their efforts to demand more censorship. Last week, the Federal Bureau of Investigation quietly announced it had resumed its outreach to social media companies. Scotland’s Police could even investigate comedians under a new hate speech law if someone complains about a joke. Major media outlets are currently working with government-funded censorship activists at the University of Washington and Stanford Internet Observatory to demand greater censorship in the name of “saving Democracy.”

Without a doubt, those of us who have uncovered censorship have had an impact. On “60 Minutes” last Sunday, the government-funded advocates of censorship at the University of Washington said they have stopped demanding censorship of social media platforms. Simply drawing awareness to who is demanding censorship and who is funding them has weakened their power.

But governments, government-funded NGOs, and the news media have been relentless in their demands for a crackdown on speech they deem hateful and false. At the Supreme Court last week, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson expressed unironic concern that the First Amendment restricts the government’s ability to censor. And everyone from the New Yorker to the New York Times to NBC is suggesting that the only people who are worried about government censorship are Trump supporters, which is obviously false.

(Snip)

__________________________________________________________________

 

[Valin]

IF you watch this You'll be a spreader of (cue the theme from Jaws) Misinformation!

You've been warned.

Mar 26, 2024

Megyn Kelly is joined by Emily Jashinsky, culture editor for The Federalist, and Eliana Johnson, co-host of the Ink-Stained Wretches podcast, to discuss 60 Minutes' absurd segment about "misinformation," corporate media gatekeepers unhappy they're losing their power, and more.

[Valin]

'60 Minutes' omits critical details about 'misinformation expert' otherwise painted as victimized researcher
Joseph MacKinnon
March 27, 2024

CBS News' "60 Minutes" recently boosted the grievances of activists who fancy themselves online narrative curators, including so-called "misinformation expert" Kate Starbird, the cofounder of the University of Washington's Center for an Informed Public.

The liberal news network framed Starbird as a defender of truth and a victim of conservative criticism but failed to mention critical biographic information about the so-called expert, namely that she's a partisan who has taken money from the Biden administration and is named as a defendant in an ongoing legal battle over censorship.

(Snip)

The censorious partisan

The liberal news outfit neglected to mention that Starbird is a radical partisan, a Biden donor, and a recipient of Biden administration grants who has collaborated with the Biden Department of Homeland Security on efforts to shut down speech deemed undesirable by the powers that be.

The Daily Caller highlighted that Starbird ran lead on a narrative-curing project that secured $2.25 million from the National Science Foundation in August 2021. The stated purpose of the initiative was to "study ways to apply collaborative, rapid-response research to mitigate online disinformation."

Upon receipt of the grant, Starbird said in a statement, "Working to advance scientific understanding of online disinformation, this research will develop and evaluate 'rapid response' methods for studying and communicating about disinformation at a sophistication and pace on par with the dynamic and interdisciplinary nature of the challenge."

Starbird was named as a defendant in a lawsuit filed last year by Jim Hoft of the Gateway Pundit and Jill Hines, codirector of the conservative Health Freedom Louisiana group, whose criticism of mask wearing was suppressed on Facebook. Starbird is also referenced in Murthy v. Missouri, the case concerning the Biden administration's efforts to have Americans censored online now before the U.S. Supreme Court.

(Snip)

The Caller indicated that "60 Minutes" did not respond to requests for comment.

Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.) responded to Starbird's interview, writing, "Missouri v. Biden exposed this. 'Misinformation Researchers' are part of the Vast Censorship Enterprise. No tax dollars to these wannabe authoritarians."

Trump advisor Stephen Miller's America First Legal noted, "Irony Alert: CBS is guilty of rank disinformation in this interview. They use Kate Starbird as their 'expert' ... but they don't tell you that Starbird is the defendant in our lawsuit alleging a vast scheme to silence speech and deprive Americans of their fundamental civil rights."

_____________________________________________