[Minitrue] FEC chair summons Facebook, Twitter, Google to disinformation session

[Brian4Liberty]

FEC chair summons Facebook, Twitter, Google to disinformation session
By NANCY SCOLA 08/29/2019

The chair of the FEC is summoning Facebook, Google and Twitter to a meeting next month on digital disinformation amid concerns that new forms of Russian-style social media manipulation will target the 2020 election.

"The goal of the symposium will be to identify effective policy approaches and practical tools that can minimize the disruption and confusion sown by fraudulent news and propaganda in the 2020 campaign," reads the invitation sent by the office of FEC Chairwoman Ellen Weintraub, a Democrat, and obtained by POLITICO.
...
Facebook and Twitter plan to send representatives to the session, the companies confirmed to POLITICO. A Google spokesperson did not immediately comment.

While Russian election interference has been a central focus since the 2016 election, the event will address growing concerns about home-grown disinformation, too, according an FEC official familiar with the event, who requested anonymity to discuss the session, which has not yet been made public.

“Under the First Amendment, we don’t ban false statements in advertising and social media, but there’s a difference between the right to speak and the right to be disseminated” online, the official said.
...
The social networks have been widely criticized for allowing the Kremlin-linked Internet Research Agency to abuse their platforms during the 2016 election. Many of the Russian ads and posts, which were viewed by millions of people, disparaged Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton, boosted Donald Trump or stoked divisions in American society, such as those over the Black Lives Matter movement.
...
The September disinformation event is, according to the FEC official, being co-hosted by Stanford University and the non-profit group PEN America, which focuses on free expression issues.
...
More: https://www.politico.com/story/2019/...mation-1692742

[Swordsmyth]

FEC chair summons Facebook, Twitter, Google to disinformation session
By NANCY SCOLA 08/29/2019

What does "[Minitrue]" mean?

[Swordsmyth]

but there’s a difference between the right to speak and the right to be disseminated” online

There is no "Freedom of the Press"?

[TheCount]

There is no "Freedom of the Press"?

Freedom of the press does not entitle you to publish what you want in someone else's newspaper.

[Swordsmyth]

Freedom of the press does not entitle you to publish what you want in someone else's newspaper.

It prohibits the Government from interfering.

[TheCount]

It prohibits the Government from interfering.

Isn't that the opposite of what you've been advocating?

[Swordsmyth]

Isn't that the opposite of what you've been advocating?

No.

[Brian4Liberty]

What does "[Minitrue]" mean?

Newspeak abbreviation for Ministry of Truth. We now have a virtual Ministry of Truth, not enclosed in a single huge building, but distributed among the Internet-Media-Government Complex.

[Brian4Liberty]

There is no "Freedom of the Press"?

You are free to write down anything you want. You just don’t have the right to “disseminate” anything you want online, or publicly share it online.

Freedom of the press does not entitle you to publish what you want in someone else's newspaper.

I must have missed the part where the article talks about newspapers, publishers, private property or private information sharing platforms. This is about the FEC, no doubt in partnership with other selected swamp MIC think-tanks like NewsGuard, deciding what content is “disinformation” and must be censored.

Last I heard, the “internet” is not a newspaper, or owned by a specific entity.

[Occam's Banana]

What does "[Minitrue]" mean?

Newspeak abbreviation for Ministry of Truth. We now have a virtual Ministry of Truth, not enclosed in a single huge building, but distributed among the Internet-Media-Government Complex.

"The Ministry of Peace concerns itself with war, the Ministry of Truth with lies, the Ministry of Love with torture and the Ministry of Plenty with starvation. These contradictions are not accidental, nor do they result from ordinary hypocrisy: they are deliberate exercises in doublethink."

-- George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four (Part II, Chapter IX)

Minipax = Ministry of Peace
Minitrue = Ministry of Truth
Miniluv = Ministry of Love
Miniplenty = Ministry of Plenty

Ministries of Nineteen Eighty-Four



Make Orwell Fiction Again

[Brian4Liberty]

Will ElectionGuard and NewsGuard be invited?

Related:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...-ElectionGuard

[Brian4Liberty]

The “Trust Project” will certainly be there, unless they want to remain in stealth mode...

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...ilence-Dissent

[Swordsmyth]

The “Trust Project” will certainly be there, unless they want to remain in stealth mode...

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...ilence-Dissent

Same for the "Integrity Initiative":

Major Psy-Op In Europe Exposed: UK Government Tramples On Values It Vowed To Protect

Covert British Military-Smear Machine Moving Into US

[brushfire]

...and, Trumpsplaining (Xd Chess) = doublethink

[Swordsmyth]

...and, Trumpsplaining (Xd Chess) = doublethink

Trump isn't behind this, she is his enemy, she recently attacked him about voter fraud.

[brushfire]

Trump isn't behind this, she is his enemy, she recently attacked him about voter fraud.

Perhaps she is... There's just so many parallels with today's government and "1984" - its just mind blowing. I see Trump and many of his supporters, who seem to me, should be suffering from serious cognitive dissonance. I've often thought of "doublethink" when I hear some of these crazy justifications/explanations about some master plan the president is rolling out... I guess it was out of context.

Back on topic, I recently watched Chappelle's netflix special, and in one of the extras he talked about how he was out with Chris Tucker, Kamala Harris, Gavin Newsom, and Sergey Brin - rockin the town. Kamala had Chappelle call Obama's voicemail. While I dont consider Chappelle part of this ring, these people are definitely conspiring a campaign of election tampering that will put put any Russian conspiracy (if it were true) to shame.

What's really interesting though, is how litigation is beginning to pierce these platforms, and recoil against the politicians that use them:

Pool spoke to this on his youtube channel today - pretty interesting

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iy_HQdkNWbo

[Occam's Banana]

From another thread: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...-Truth-anymore

Social media has made it abundantly clear that simple differences of opinion aren't going to be tolerated for much longer... so anyone with a tinfoil-hat idea can get removed with impugnity. What little reach ever existed there is getting choked off. There is a tiny ray of hope that this might change, but it rests entirely on two entities: PragerU, and the US legal system, and I trust each of those entities exactly as far as I'm willing to push an ice pick into my own testicle.

Here's the video fisharmor referenced:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USZaR3bDbnU


As described in the video, PragerU is suing Google/YouTube (in both federal and California state courts) for violation of the First Amendment (among other things). The federal court dismissed the First Amendment claim because Google and YouTube are not government entities. PragerU appealed this decision, and oral arguments on the (9th circuit) appeal were supposed to occur "next week" (this video was published on August 21st).

Per the discussion just after the 8:00 mark, there are apparently four conditions from established case law under which individuals or entities can be subject to First Amendment claims. These are:

1. if the person or entity is actually part of the government (e.g., a government official or office/department/etc.)
2. if the person or entity is a government "agent" or contractor
3. if the person or entity is "entangled" with the government in some respect such that it cannot be treated separately from the government (e.g., an organization that receives substantial grants or subsidies from the government)
4. if the person or entity has amassed sufficient control or influence over some domain so as to effectively be able to "act" as the/a government

If this is correct, it would seem that points 3 and/or 4 could apply with respect to the shenanigans described in Brian's OP.
(And I wonder if the PragerU lawyers are aware of or could use stuff like the OP to make the case for their appeal ...)

I am reflexively and categorically opposed to forcing private property owners to provide a platform for anything that they for any reason do not want to publish. But as clearly illustrated by the OP article, the increasingly intertwined relationship between the government and certain private organizations (such as Google/YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, etc.) is making it more and more problematic, if not impossible, to distinguish between them ...

"The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which."

-- George Orwell, Animal Farm

Make Orwell Fiction Again

[Warlord]

The internet is the digital public square as ruled by the Supreme's so their bans of Alex Jones and recently David Knight is illegal.

[Swordsmyth]

YouTube Says It's "More Important Than Ever" To Be Open Platform – One Day After Massive Banning Spree

[mahyaar212]

Mahyaar Academy is clearly one of the best ways for you to secure all the essential abilities in web advancement since we genuinely wish the majority of our understudies to turn out to be extremely capable experts.