week, Mark Zuckerberg made the media rounds to give a rather shady
explanation of why Facebook suddenly closed hundreds of incredibly
popular pages in what’s being called The
Alternative Media Purge. Zuckerberg accused the closed pages, many
of which had millions of fans, of spreading “political spam.”
many of the pages that were shut down had absolutely nothing to do with
politics or elections, unless you include the fact that they recommended
skipping the entire circus. None of these pages were accused of being
“the Russians,” who were the scapegoat of the last surprise presidential
election results. A couple of the things that many of the pages did have in common,
incidentally, were an anti-war outlook and a police watchdog mentality.
as far as making the election more resistant to interference, the result
of the Alternative Media Purge is the diametric opposite. People will
now only get one side of the story.
alternative media changed everything during the last presidential
our poll - story continues below
Donald Trump announced his candidacy for president, much of the world
snickered. Who was this reality television star to take on part of the
Clinton Empire? There was no way, people scoffed, that Trump could
a proven fact that Hillary Clinton was in cahoots with the mainstream
media throughout her candidacy. And the reason it’s proven is that
organizations like Wikileaks released the evidence of it in a series of
emails with her campaign manager and people like Donna Brazile of
finally publically admitted that she’d done so and that it was her
“job to make all our Democratic candidates look good.”
alternative media jumped on this story, as well as many other
questionable emails that were divulged by Wikileaks, while the
mainstream pretended that none of this was happening. And the mainstream
did very little to cover the Democratic National Convention, during
which the nomination was stolen from Bernie Sanders, who – if we’re
being honest – probably would have had a much better chance of beating
Trump than the notoriously unlikable Clinton. Here’s my
coverage of it at the time.
alternative media, never a fan of the goings-on in Clintonland, from
scandal all the way back
to the “suicide” of Vince Foster in Arkansas, jumped on these
stories as well as stories about her debatable health.
fact that we had a robust alternative media at the time meant that these
stories were heard. At the same time, the mainstream media was busy
painting Donald Trump as a neo-Nazi fascist who hated minorities and
would nuke somebody the day he got into office.
imagine there had been no alternative media during that election.
we hadn’t have had an alternative media telling other stories – enough
stories that people were able to get a fuller picture of who both of
these candidates really were – things might have turned out entirely
differently. And while that would be all right with any number of people
who loathe Donald Trump, would it have been a “fair” election?
look back even further at the candidacy of Congressman Ron Paul back in
2012. Dr. Paul was an incredible candidate with a glowing political
resume, but he didn’t get the time of day. There was a media blackout on
his candidacy and finally, he was forced to withdraw from the race. Many
of us were budding alternative journalists at that time learned a
valuable lesson during that election – what we were doing was important.
There needed to be an option instead of letting the mainstream media
present the only options and information to people.
the time the 2016 election rolled around, those disappointed in how Dr.
Paul was treated were determined that it would not happen again. That a
candidate with a background full of sordid scandals would not get
through an election cycle unscathed, painted as a glowing Madonna who
would save us all.
the fierce battle between Clinton and Trump, both sides of the story
were told and told loudly.
journalists engaged the power of social media to connect with people who
wanted to know more and they did it to such a degree that everything
changed. Clinton, originally the front-runner, was suddenly in the fight
of her life against a candidate that most people had considered a joke.
that’s when everyone started blaming the Russians.
a shocking article, the Washington Post printed a long list of websites
that they claimed were run by “the Russians.” Many of these sites were
run by folks I know personally who are decidedly not Russians, but
simply bloggers who wanted to share the truth as they identified it.
(This article was removed from WaPo – I’m guessing due to threats about
legal action by many of the site owners accused of working for Russia.)
investigation after investigation has been undertaken, there’s
proof that Russia tampered with the election, nor
that they colluded with Donald Trump.
later, the Washington Post sticks to their story with headlines like “Without
the Russians, Trump Wouldn’t Have Won.” In the piece, they
admitted that there isn’t any official proof and they cited Buzzfeed.
intelligence agencies are silent on the impact of Russia’s attack, outside
experts who have examined the Kremlin campaign — which included
stealing and sharing Democratic Party emails, spreading propaganda
online and hacking state voter rolls — have concluded that it did
affect an extremely close election decided by fewer than 80,000
votes in three states. Clint Watts, a former FBI agent, writes
in his recent book, “Messing
with the Enemy,” that “Russia absolutely
influenced the U.S. presidential election,” especially in Michigan and
Wisconsin, where Trump’s winning margin was less than 1 percent in
still don’t know the full extent of the Russian interference, but we
know its propaganda reached 126 million
people via Facebook alone. A
BuzzFeed analysis found that
fake news stories on Facebook generated more social engagement in the
last three months of the campaign than did legitimate articles: The
“20 top-performing false election stories from hoax sites and
hyperpartisan blogs generated 8,711,000 shares, reactions, and
comments on Facebook.” Almost all of this “fake news” was either
started or spread by Russian bots, including claims that
the pope had endorsed Trump and that Hillary Clinton had sold weapons
to the Islamic State. (source)
Isn’t that where you go to take a quiz to find out what kind of potato
leads us to Facebook’s potential election interference
week, as I mentioned, hundreds of Facebook pages were shut down without
warning. Many of these sites also lost their Twitter accounts on the
same day. This is reminiscent of last month’s attack on Alex Jones.
who disagrees with the establishment is being abruptly silenced.
and friends are saying that this is so that we can be sure we don’t have
election interference in the midterms…but what they’re really doing is
interfering in the elections themselves.
gloated about everything from “featuring
Facebook pages that spread disinformation less prominently so that
fewer people potentially see them” to “559
politically oriented pages and 251 accounts, all of American origin,
for consistently breaking its rules against “spam and coordinated
pages which have been removed or shadowbanned have run the gamut of
political philosophies, but the fact is, people like Mark Zuckerberg,
the folks at Google, and Jack Dorsey of Twitter are deciding which
information gets to be seen. They’re deciding whether something is
“disinformation” or truth. They’re deciding if people who have spent
years building a following get to still reach the people who opted to
Facebook reaches more than 2 billion people each day, this is a problem
of epic proportions.
believe that it is Facebook itself that is tampering with the election
by manipulating what they want people to see. If the alternative
media changed everything in the 2016 election due to the availability of
more information, Facebook will change future elections due to their
manipulation of the information users are allowed to see.
you are conservative or antiwar or anti-overreaching-government or
libertarian, you’re now persona non grata. Even if you aren’t in the
minority, you’ll be made to feel like you are in the giant echo chamber
of “approved media.” If you support a different candidate than Big Tech,
prepare to be marginalized, silenced, and ignored. That holds true
whether you opt for anyone other than their “choice.” They WILL control
the outcome of the presidential election the next time around.
you really want to see what election interference looks like, you’re
getting a live demonstration right now.
posted with permission from Daisy