Facebook has removed nearly 150 accounts and pages linked to anti-lockdown demonstrators in Germany Thursday under a new policy focused on addressing groups that work together to spread harmful content.
(July 29, 2021)
In its ruling, the Karlsruhe-based court said that while Facebook had the right to decide what stays on or off the platform, it needs to be more forthcoming with users on how it does so. The court found that the social media company did not inform two users that it had removed their posts. It added that the company should have also informed and given users an opportunity to respond before suspending them from its platform.
The decision sets a major precedent for how social media companies police content on their platforms, likely giving a boost to EU lawmakers in Brussels, who are pushing to add further obligations on social media companies.
These clauses raises up the following urgent questions:
1) Does a government, which is the executive branch in democracy, have the right to make an obligation to restrict the legislative branch (the parliament), as well as restrict the Judiciary branch of democracy (courts)?
2) Can a government make an obligation to foreign entities that they will have a right to oversight and vet the decisions of the legislative branch (the parliament), as well as decide whether or not the decisions of the Judiciary branch of democracy (courts) are valid or not?
3) Does these contracts represent a danger to democracy, especially as they were done in secrecy?
Since it was posted by Ehden, other “contracts” have leaked, which contain similar language and clauses. But, as these aren’t 100% proven genuine either, it would be wrong to use them to corroborate each other.
Stronger evidence can be found on the website of the Israeli Ministry of Health, where they have a (heavily redacted) copy of their “REAL-WORLD EPIDEMIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE COLLABORATION AGREEMENT” with Pfizer (we downloaded a copy of that too, just in case.)
These two documents do have some strong similarities.
07/08/2021 by Ehden Biber
אני עומד לחשוף לפניכם את הסודות הכי גדולים שהמדינה שלכם מסתירה מכם, המוסתרים בחוזה שלהם עם פייזר. מה שאתם עומדים לקרוא לא פורסם בשום כלי תקשורת ישראלי, ולכן החשיבות שלו היא ענקית.
If you haven’t heard about the #PfizerLeak, I congratulate you for listening only to mainstream media. So for those who have no idea what’s going on, here is a brief summary:
(January 19, 2021)
Kontrata e shumëpërfolur ndërmjet qeverisë shqiptare dhe korporatës farmaceutike “Pfizer” është siguruar ekskluzivisht nga “Gogo.al”.
It’s time to switch to ProtonMail, and to private text messaging services such as Signal. It’s time to abandon YouTube for video platforms such as Rumble.
We can depart of our own accord, in a dignified manner. Or we can wait to be cancelled by these malignant corporations.
Sky News confirmed the temporary ban and a spokesperson said „we support broad discussion and debate on a wide range of topics and perspectives which is vital to any democracy“.
The Government’s new Online Safety Bill will be ‚catastrophic‘ for ordinary people’s freedom of speech, former minister David Davis warned today.
The Conservative MP said forcing social networks to take down content in Britain they deem unacceptable ’seems out of Orwell’s 1984′.
Mr Davis, 72, slammed the idea Silicon Valley firms could take down posts they think are ’not politically correct – even though it is legal‘.
Scheming eurocrats provoked outrage when it emerged they were drawing up plans to pull our critically-acclaimed shows like The Crown and Peaky Blinders from European streaming services. The news – which emerged in a memo sent to the EU’s 27 member states – was quickly compared to Soviet Russia which was notorious for its thought police tactics.
The EU is considering proposals to exclude British programs from European quotas, a move that could severely hit international sales of U.K. films and TV series to the EU.
Too many on what passes for the left today are keen to dismiss the free-speech crisis in universities as a ‘right-wing myth’. They brush off the countless examples of censorship as overhyped. And they ignore concerns about the moral policing of dissenting views.
In short, they effectively deny that a free-speech crisis exists. And they do so by attacking those who are sounding the alarm. As far as these deniers are concerned, the problem is not cancel culture; it is those dishonest myth-makers who are drawing attention to it.
This new political battle does not break down along left v. right lines. This is an information war waged by corporate media to silence any competition or dissent.
“We need to stop fascism so let’s give massive sweeping powers to an elite alliance of unelected authoritarians.”
“Well I’m a leftist and I haven’t been banned on social media.”
That’s because the left is politically impotent in our society. Unless this is just a hobby for you, at some point you should plan on the left becoming a threat to the oligarchs and warmongers. What do you think happens then?
Do you really think if the left actually becomes a threat to the status quo the Neera Tandens and Rachel Maddows aren’t going to suddenly discover a reason why you’re dangerous and need to be censored? The only way to be fine with censorship is to plan on never challenging power.
I’ve been resisting the conclusion that this is Liberals‘ 9/11 because it at first seemed hyperbolic, even though they’re using the same weapons against their critics (if you question all the new powers they want, it means you love the Terrorists).
But this is Liberals‘ 9/11.
(Nov 12, 2020)
Twitter deleted the series of tweets within minutes, where were made using the @POTUS account. That account is reserved for any sitting U.S. president, but Trump has rarely used it.
The tweets complained about the ban, baselessly accusing the company of colluding in a conspiracy with Democrats and „the Radical Left“ while repeating some of the same rhetoric that caused the platform to ban him hours earlier.
After close review of recent Tweets from the @realDonaldTrump account and the context around them — specifically how they are being received and interpreted on and off Twitter — we have permanently suspended the account due to the risk of further incitement of violence.
After originally planning to block President Donald Trump from posting to his Facebook and Instagram account for 24 hours, CEO Mark Zuckerberg said Thursday the blocks have been extended „indefinitely.“
„We believe the risks of allowing the President to continue to use our service during this period are simply too great,“ Zuckerberg wrote in a Facebook post Thursday.
Netanyahu’s fixation with controlling the media is dangerous enough; controlling law enforcement will be worse
Germany has decided that it wants to take advantage of the present sentiment towards Facebook and not let off. This week, Berlin called for more action at a meeting on Monday of the bloc’s justice ministers.
“We cannot accept the public debate being distorted and poisoned,” said German Justice Minister Christine Lambrecht. “Voluntary commitments and self-responsibility are not enough.”
Brazilians will pretty much need a license to communicate with others — something achieved by turning platforms and app makers into bouncers at the internet nightclub.
Despite already having some of the strictest laws in the world surrounding “hate speech,” Germany is looking to tighten the leash further where it comes to social media. The new provision, when passed, will require online platforms to directly report to the federal police when any criminal activity is reported by users on these platforms.
Wojcicki made the comments during an interview with The Washington Post when she was asked whether YouTube would remove President Trump’s videos if they contained statements that were similar to those made in his tweet that was censored by Twitter last month.
The YouTube CEO said that while it’s difficult to comment on theoretical situations, if an elected official posts “content that is hateful or promotes violence in some way,” it would be removed.
The red triangle appeared in paid posts sponsored by Trump and Vice President Pence, as well as by the “Team Trump” campaign page. It was featured alongside text warning of “Dangerous MOBS” and asking users to sign a petition about antifa, a loose collection of anti-fascist activists whom the Trump administration has sought to link to recent violence, despite arrest records that show their involvement is trivial.
The popular social media site, which first announced its political ads ban last month, had not previously provided details on the new policy. On Friday, it said it will define political content as anything that references “a candidate, political party, elected or appointed government official, election, referendum, ballot measure, legislation, regulation, directive, or judicial outcome.”
Twitter said it will use a combination of automated technology and human teams to enforce the new ad policies.