Connect with us

censorship

PayPal Co-Founder Warns Financial Giant is Creating De Facto ‘No Buy List’ by Banning Dissidents

Says Silicon Valley’s woke crusade will cause more extremism.

Published

on

SOPA Images via Getty Images

PayPal co-founder David Sacks warns that the financial giant is creating a de facto ‘no buy list’ by banning people for their opinions, a move that will actually increase extremism in the long term.

In an article posted on Bari Weiss’ Substack newsletter, the investor explains how PayPal’s role has been completely reversed from its initial objective of helping ordinary people not be dependent on large financial institutions to start a business.

“But now PayPal is turning its back on its original mission. It is now leading the charge to restrict participation by those it deems unworthy,” writes Sacks.

The entrepreneur argues that by partnering with the likes of the ADL and the SPLC, PayPal has allowed itself to be used as a tool by far-left activist outfits to censor ideological opposition.

“I have no desire to defend genuinely hateful or extremist groups,” writes Sacks. “Indeed, when I was COO at PayPal, we regularly worked with law enforcement to restrict illegal activity on our platform. But we are talking about something very different here: shutting down people and organizations that express views that are entirely lawful, even if they are unpopular in Silicon Valley.”

He points to White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki’s pernicious announcement that the Biden administration is working with Facebook to directly censor information related to COVID-19 and her insistence that other platforms should mirror Facebook’s censorship policies at the behest of the government.

“The suppression of speech by the government is blatantly unconstitutional under the First Amendment,” writes Sacks, noting that PayPal is now a fully signed up member of Silicon Valley’s purge of undesirables.

“Now PayPal has gone much further, creating the economic equivalent of the No-Fly List with the ADL’s assistance. If history is any guide, other fintech companies will soon follow suit. As we saw in the case of speech restrictions, the political monoculture that prevails among employees of these companies will create pressure for all of them to act as a bloc.”

“When someone mistakenly lands on the No-Fly List, they can at least sue or petition the government for redress. But when your name lands on a No-Buy List created by a consortium of private fintech companies, to whom can you appeal?”

Sacks highlights how the monopolies created by fintech giants and the way they act in unison when banning individuals or groups is literally creating a society where dissidents will find it difficult to even function in society.

“Kicking people off social media deprives them of the right to speak in our increasingly online world,” he writes.

“Locking them out of the financial economy is worse: It deprives them of the right to make a living. We have seen how cancel culture can obliterate one’s ability to earn an income, but now the cancelled may find themselves without a way to pay for goods and services.”

Sacks concludes by noting that the same resentment against elites that handed Trump victory in 2016 is merely being re-created by Silicon Valley, while their stated policy goal of reducing “extremism” is actually having the opposite effect.

“If we continue down this path, a far more dangerous demagogue could emerge. I implore my successors at PayPal and other Big Tech companies to stop throwing kindling on the fires of populism by locking people out of the online public square and the modern web-based economy. Silenced voices and empty stomachs are fuel for the very extremism you claim to oppose,” writes Sacks.

He warns that deplatforming is creating “hordes of desperate people, denied a voice and livelihood,” who will simply vote for an autocratic dictator the first chance they get.

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter:

———————————————————————————————————————

Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

PJW Shop

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.

———————————————————————————————————————

Continue Reading
Comments

censorship

Fact Checkers Demand YouTube Censor Competitors Because No One is Watching Their Content

“It doesn’t seem to do very well.”

Published

on

picture alliance via Getty Images

‘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:

———————————————————————————————————————

Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

PJW Shop

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.

———————————————————————————————————————

Continue Reading

censorship

New York Times Worries That Big Tech Won’t Censor Hard Enough During Midterm Elections

Complains about success of ‘2000 Mules’.

Published

on

Robert Nickelsberg via Getty Images

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:

———————————————————————————————————————

Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

PJW Shop

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.

———————————————————————————————————————

Continue Reading

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

on

Kate Green via Getty Images

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:

———————————————————————————————————————

Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

PJW Shop

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.

———————————————————————————————————————

Continue Reading

Trending