censorship
Government’s ‘Online Safety’ Bill Will Limit Free Speech, Lead To Massive ‘State-backed Censorship’ Warn Watchdogs
“A frightening and historic attack on freedom of speech”
Published
1 year agoon
Steve Watson

Free speech activists in the UK have warned that new government legislation aimed at social media companies is set to decimate free speech and bring in ‘state-backed censorship’ on an unprecedented scale.
The ‘Online Safety’ Bill is being introduced with the justification of forcing big tech to be more accountable for ‘harmful’ content on their websites.
However, activists have noted that it will could be used to remove any opinions and content that big tech or the state do not agree with, and could lead to more publishers being permanently banned from platforms.
The legislation gives the government Office of Communications the power to issue fines of up to £18million or 10 per cent of their annual global turnover if that is higher, and to completely block access to platforms.
Privacy campaign group Big Brother Watch has labelled the legislation “state-backed censorship and monitoring on a scale never seen before in a liberal democracy.”
🗣️The Bill seeks to clamp down on any speech that risks "having, or indirectly having, a significant adverse physical or psychological impact on an adult".
— Big Brother Watch (@BigBrotherWatch) May 12, 2021
This definition is overly broad. A law like this could easily result in the silencing of any speech deemed undesirable.
The Bill also threatens the right to have a private conversation online – making clear that messaging services will be in scope.
— Big Brother Watch (@BigBrotherWatch) May 12, 2021
We must fight this draconian legislation, protect our rights online and safeguard online speech. ⬇️https://t.co/97Q8HJMclF
We'll have much more analysis on this in the days and weeks to come.
— Big Brother Watch (@BigBrotherWatch) May 12, 2021
👀 Here's our statement in response to the #OnlineSafetyBill ⬇️#OnlineHarms https://t.co/V6kESpGAZm
Another activist group. The Free Speech Union noted that the draft legislation effectively brings media created content on social networks “within scope of a state regulator.”
Another group, The Adam Smith Institute labelled the move “a frightening and historic attack on freedom of speech.”
“The Government should not have the power to instruct private firms to remove legal speech in a free society,” commented Matthew Lesh of the Institute.
‘The scope of these proposals is practically limitless, encompassing everything from ‘trolling’ to ‘fraud’ and ‘misinformation’,” he added.
Lesh further warned that “The vagueness of the legislation means there will be nothing to stop Ofcom and a future government including any additional measures in future.”
Jim Killock, Executive Director of Open Rights Group also weighed in, urging that ‘Treating online speech as inherently dangerous and demanding that risks are eliminated under the threat of massive fines is only going to end up in over-reaction and content removal.”
The legislation is set to be reviewed by a joint committee of MPs, and then brought to Parliament.
The move is yet another example of government using the broad definition of ‘hate speech’ to put into place tools that can be used to silence dissent or opinions it does not want in the public realm.
The legislation was drafted and announced following a sustained campaign involving celebrities and sports personalities who demanded that big tech companies should be held more accountable for instances of racism and bullying on its platforms.
SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:
Follow on Twitter: Follow @PrisonPlanet———————————————————————————————————————
Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/
ALERT! In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.
We need you to sign up for our free newsletter here.
Support our sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.
Also, we urgently need your financial support here.
———————————————————————————————————————
You may like
-
UK Police Now Investigating Playground Insults
-
Big Updates About Village of 700 Residents Set to Host 1500 Migrants
-
Videos: Violent Attacks On Pregnancy Clinics Continue
-
Videos: Democrats Say They Could Erect ABORTION TENTS In National Parks, Hand Out Abortion VOUCHERS
-
China Suggests it Could Maintain ‘Zero COVID’ Policy For 5 Years
-
“My Body, My Choice” Activists Malfunction When Asked About Vaccine Mandates
censorship
Fact Checkers Demand YouTube Censor Competitors Because No One is Watching Their Content
“It doesn’t seem to do very well.”

Published
2 days agoon
27 June, 2022
‘Fact checkers’ are demanding that YouTube censor more videos for “misinformation,” with one of the reasons being that no one is watching their content.
Well, this is awkward.
The censorship demand was made during the GlobalFact 9, a fact-checking conference organized by the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN).
“As an international network of fact-checking organizations, we monitor how lies spread online — and every day, we see that YouTube is one of the major conduits of online disinformation and misinformation worldwide. This is a significant concern among our global fact-checking community,” the IFCN previously wrote in a letter to YouTube.
During the conference itself, Angie Drobnic Holan, editor-in-chief of PolitiFact, complained that fact checker groups are struggling because no one is interested in watching their content.
“YouTube does not seem to raise accurate, credible information in its algorithms. We have had a lot of experience with YouTube making videos of fact-checking content. It doesn’t seem to do very well,” Holan. “I think most news organizations are extremely frustrated with your platform,” she added.
In other words, no one cares about boring, hyper-partisan content put out by dubious ‘fact checker’ groups, therefore their more successful competition must be censored!
YouTube’s Brandon Feldman responded by assuring the group it was doing more to elevate “authoritative sources.”
On YouTube, this manifests itself in the form of content from mainstream news networks and regime institutions appearing at the top of search results, with dissenting narratives buried deep down the list, if they appear at all.
But apparently, not even this is enough.
As we previously highlighted, the co-founder of one of the world’s leading ‘fact checker’ organizations, which presents itself as a supreme authority on which sources of information can be trusted, labeled the now completely confirmed genuine Hunter Biden laptop story a “hoax”.
The Wuhan lab leak, a theory now accepted by the head of the World Health Organization, was also once shadow banned as a result of it being declared a “conspiracy theory” by fact checkers.
Whenever stories emerge that are hugely damaging to the regime and the military-industrial complex, fact checkers are weaponized to bury them by falsely labeling such stories ‘misleading’ or hoaxes even if they are completely authentic.
This then serves to justify their censorship by social media algorithms and the targeted banning and deplatforming of anyone who tries to amplify them.
Fact checkers aren’t impartial, independent outlets, they are merely hyper-partisan information attack dogs working on behalf of the regime.
SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:
Follow on Twitter: Follow @PrisonPlanet
———————————————————————————————————————
Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/
ALERT!
In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.
I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here.
Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.
Get early access, exclusive content and behinds the scenes stuff by following me on Locals.
———————————————————————————————————————
censorship
New York Times Worries That Big Tech Won’t Censor Hard Enough During Midterm Elections
Complains about success of ‘2000 Mules’.

Published
5 days agoon
24 June, 2022
The New York Times has published an article expressing its concerns that Big Tech platforms like Facebook and Twitter aren’t doing enough to censor “misinformation” in the run-up to the midterm elections.
The article complains that Meta (Facebook) has slashed its ‘election misinformation’ team from 300 people during 2020 to just 60 people and that Mark Zuckerberg no longer meets with the team directly.
Civil rights groups are also apparently upset that Zuckerberg is less interested in communicating with them about efforts to stop ‘election misinformation’.
According to the piece, Twitter is also likely to be less censorious towards election information due to the likelihood that it is about to be purchased by Elon Musk.
“I’m concerned,” President of the NAACP Derrick Johnson told the newspaper. “It appears to be out of sight, out of mind.”
Noting that there are numerous political candidates running for office in 2022 who agree with Donald Trump that the 2020 presidential election was stolen, the Times laments that Meta’s reduction in censorship “could have far-reaching consequences as faith in the U.S. electoral system reaches a brittle point.”
The article also whines about the viral success of Dinesh D’Souza’s documentary ‘2000 Mules’, which received over a million views on alternative video hosting platform Rumble and also received 430,000 “interactions” on Facebook, proof according to the newspaper that election misinformation is “rampant” online.
Representatives from both Facebook and Twitter responded by assuring the Times that they are still keenly focused on censoring election “misinformation.”
“Before the 2020 US presidential election, Big Tech platforms deployed unprecedented levels of censorship by censoring then-President Donald Trump numerous times, banning popular pro-Trump groups, and more,” writes Reclaim the Net.
“Post-election, this mass censorship continued with President Trump being permanently banned by all the major tech platforms, discussions of “widespread fraud or errors” changing the 2020 US presidential election outcome being banned, free speech platform Parler (which many users had flocked to in an attempt to escape Big Tech’s censorship) being deplatformed by the tech giants, and more.”
“The mainstream media and Big Tech used the vague, subjective term “election misinformation” to justify this silencing of a sitting US President and the mass censorship of election-related speech.
The legacy media is once again likely to weaponize hyper-partisan ‘fact checkers’ to ensure that information which isn’t completely censored is at least shadow banned and relegated by algorithms so fewer Americans will see it.
SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:
Follow on Twitter: Follow @PrisonPlanet
———————————————————————————————————————
Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/
ALERT!
In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.
I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here.
Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.
Get early access, exclusive content and behinds the scenes stuff by following me on Locals.
———————————————————————————————————————
censorship
“I Don’t Believe in Censoring Art”: Paramount CEO Rejects Trigger Warnings
“You don’t have to watch anything you don’t want to.”

Published
5 days agoon
23 June, 2022
Paramount CEO Bob Bakish has refused to add trigger warnings to the company’s historical content, asserting, “I don’t believe in censoring art.”
Bakish says the back catalogue for the film studio’s new subscription streaming service Paramount+ will not be censored to please modern politically correct sensibilities.
“By definition, you have some things that were made in a different time and reflect different sensibilities,” Bakish said.
“I don’t believe in censoring art that was made historically, that’s probably a mistake. It’s all on-demand – you don’t have to watch anything you don’t want to.”
As we have previously highlighted, other streaming platforms and broadcasters have censored or outright deleted old shows and movies for containing so-called ‘offensive’ content.
Earlier this year, UK streaming platform ITV Player censored a “homophobic” line from the 2002 Spiderman movie when Spiderman says to Bonesaw, “That’s a cute outfit. Did your husband give it to you?”
During the height of the 2020 Black Lives Matter riots, UK broadcaster Sky also tagged numerous movies, some little over a decade old, with a message warning viewers that they might be offensive.
“This film has outdated attitudes, language and cultural depictions which may cause offence today,” stated the trigger warning.
During the same year, PBS removed Gone With the Wind from its platform, in the process erasing the first black female actress to win an Oscar, while the BBC also announced it was removing Little Britain from its schedule despite the fact that the TV comedy series satirizes every demographic, often highlighting small minded attitudes of bigots.
Last year, NBC also announced that it was scanning 17,000 hours of past WWE content to weed out “racist” material in order to avoid it appearing on the network’s new Peacock streaming device.
Iconic historical books are also being re-written to reflect ‘modern attitudes’, including George Orwell’s 1984.
SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:
Follow on Twitter: Follow @PrisonPlanet
———————————————————————————————————————
Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/
ALERT!
In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.
I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here.
Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.
Get early access, exclusive content and behinds the scenes stuff by following me on Locals.
———————————————————————————————————————
Trending
-
Politics5 days ago
Biden Given ‘Cheat Sheet’ That Instructs Him How to Say “Hello” And Sit Down
-
U.S. News5 days ago
Rand Paul Says Gun Control Bill Was Kept ‘Secret’ And Senators Not Allowed Time To Read It
-
Economy7 days ago
Pathetic: Only 11 Per Cent Believe Biden Narrative That Putin is to Blame For Record Gas Prices
-
censorship2 days ago
Fact Checkers Demand YouTube Censor Competitors Because No One is Watching Their Content
-
Immigration7 days ago
Student Kicked Out of UK College For Supporting Deportation of Illegal Immigrants
-
Economy5 days ago
Video: Reporter Asks White House If Americans’ Only Choice Is “$5 A Gallon Gas Or A $61,000 Electric Car?”
-
Health2 days ago
Video: Abortion Laws Worldwide Are More Restrictive Than In The U.S.
-
LGBT5 days ago
Pennsylvania Drag Queen Arrested and Charged With Possessing Child Pornography