>Facebook removing "fake news"
>Google searches favoring Hillary Clinton
>Twitter banning conservative users
Save us, Solidus!
Facebook removing "fake news"
Benjamin Barnes
Other urls found in this thread:
nytimes.com
reddigital.cl
washingtonpost.com
twitter.com
Zachary Ross
What are the news being labeled as fakes?
Can someone tell me what's the criteria being used, I need to know for reasons...
Jace Stewart
If it's true it's fake.
That's it.
Thomas Morris
Examples of "fake news" being removed please.
Julian Collins
Examples goddammit.
We need to determine what it's being pushed downwards, so we can develop a counter strategy.
Nathan Robinson
Info bars :--_DD
Eli Reyes
As far as I can tell, they are still just setting the groundwork. You can see it starting to be mentioned in all kinds of papers, mostly in articles totally unrelated to the subject, to comprehensively plant the idea in people's minds.
When they do start picking targets it will happen with speed and coordination so that we don't have time to react.
The best thing we can do right now is push back against the idea itself: no one is the ultimate objective arbitrator of The Truth, and it certainly isn't Mark fucking Zuckerberg. The public already know they can't trust him. We need to use that.
Kevin Johnson
Were you seriously expecting a serious answer? lmao
Sup Forums doesn't know shit
Ian White
You shouldn't be using any of those.
Jayden Edwards
Thay want to prevent the election of Le Pen and the collapse of the EU then, never believed how close we were.
Some of them are more than smart enough, and well versed and informed, lurk more before talking shit about them.
They will go one issue at a time, they can't go faster than we do at the moment, and we can go way faster than now, they are about to be surprised.
Ryan Russell
1. Archive important things
2. Spy on involved censoring entities (hack)
3. Gather info and have it published via a large and well known supporter (Wikileaks or similar)
Nathan Jenkins
I have lurked for long enough to know Sup Forums
As you can see, they still haven't mentioned any examples.
I hope you realize sooner rather than later that Sup Forums is filled with lies, including the OP itself when it comes to removing "fake news"
Also, as a general rule, the average Sup Forums poster is the opposite of smart.
Also, Le Pen is legit shit. The Les Republican candidate is way better.
Connor Carter
You have to swim through the shitpost.
Info bars it's a good example, and discerning what you can't see, it's harder than discerning what you can see.
Le Pen being a good or bad candidate it's not important, the fact it's that they don't want a goverment in France that's opposed to the EU, and will fight teeth and nails against it.
Brandon Barnes
>Le Pen being a good or bad candidate it's not important, the fact it's that they don't want a goverment in France that's opposed to the EU, and will fight teeth and nails against it.
Which means Le Pen is the right choice.
This shit has to stop.
Say bye bye fascistic EU. Say hello Europe.
Joseph Ramirez
Except it's not always shit posting that lies (see: OP)
The Eurosceptism thing is nothing compared to Le Pen as a whole. Fillion would be way better even if he stayed in the EU.
No, you overrated the EU way too much or you think it's worth to leave but having Le Pen in power.
Christian Jackson
Censorship in facebook it's a thing, and anti fake news meassures are being taken.
Who people choose to be their president, it's not your bussiness, french anons would decide that, but in the EU you don't get that benefit, the next president would be decided by the globalist, that's the issue here, they will try to "fix" the election, so no one opposed to them gets above 30% of the votes, or that could open the chance for a referendum, like it did in England.
Samuel Reyes
feels like 1984 novlangue.
Joseph Allen
Any examples of such and how those would fit a particular agenda? You yourself asked for example of this, now you are claiming as a fact they exist? Come on...
>Who people choose to be their president, it's not your bussiness, french anons would decide that
So fucking what? I can still comment on it and tell those frenchies how stupid they are for voting Le Pen.
>but in the EU you don't get that benefit
Literally wrong.
>the next president would be decided by the globalist
First of all, don't fall for the "muh evil globalism!" meme. There are certainly a lot of bad things about it, but you exaggerate and take it to a whole new level.
Second, it's not the globalist who chooses, it's the same people. Fillion is honestly a good candidate that would put France on a better way, regardless if he was elected by the globalists or not. And judging by the bets, it's either him or Pen, and Pen isn't worth it.
>so no one opposed to them gets above 30% of the votes, or that could open the chance for a referendum, like it did in England.
Yeah, because leaving the EU might not be such a good thing after all, that'd what most people seem to think.
She's not a good candidate, just accept this.
Cooper Howard
nytimes.com
Here it's Zuckenberg talking about his censorship tool.
I'm not taking globalism to a new level, it's exactly the same globalism, that it ever was, coordinated media, global banks, and global capitals, if you can recall, we had to deal with all of that in Pascua Lama, when they didn't wanted to stop destroying the glaciar, that would have left all of the people in the Huasco valley without water, wich it's bad.
We need to look closely to the French election, but even if you can run your mouth and say whatever you want, French people can't, EU hate speech laws prevent that.
Even if they don't like what they are saying, I will still defend their right to say it.
Remaining or leaving the EU it's something that has to be decided by the people in a referendum, not by the media or the social media.
Zachary Kelly
Yeah, censored on China as requested by the government, not Mark himself as an anti conservative conspiracy.
Coordinated media is shitty, but please don't fall for the global bankers and capitalists thing. That's pure bullshit. They exists, yeah, but that's not a bad thing.
Yeah, the Pascua Lama thing was pretty shitty.
The French can still say anything they want over here.
Dylan Rivera
Merkel announced that she will also attack fake news.
Her globalist overlords demand it.
Fuck these people.
MSM fails hard and loses all credibility. Instead of thinking how to better themselves, they once again attack a straw man. They always search an existing, but unimportant problem and then make it bigger than it is, to have a distracting boogeyman.
Fuck these people.
Luke White
How are they not a bad thing? please tell me, cause I have family living in the Huasco valley, and they like drinking water, wich they won't be able to, if Barrick Gold continues to destroy the glaciar, what they can do, cause they still own the land, wich should be illegal, but the law to protect the glaciars got blocked around the same time that Rockefeller gave Lagos his shinny medal.
reddigital.cl
Zuckenberg allowed censorship in his plataform, and will allow it everywhere else, the tool it's working already, the pizzagate it's being covered, accounts are being closed left and right, some accounts got closed on the election for supporting Trump, at the time they were pushing the narrative that Trump will be the end of western civilization and he isn't, but the endorsment and censorship was obvious.
You clearly don't understand hate speech laws, cause we don't have them, but it's a really complex situation, when you can be arrested for saying the "incorrect" thing.
John Bell
Yeah, exactly. Suddenly loads of news agencies are shilling for this idea that there's a right wing conspiracy to produce fake news with the intent of stoking discontent. It started a week ago or so, I think. They're moving really fast.
And of course it's a concerted effort. There's no way Marxist governments and Marxist news agencies can randomly support the same idea -one that never existed prior to a week ago- without communicating with each other.
It's fucking disgusting, how they act. I even had a friend send one of these idiotic articles to our groups of friends, with him completely buying into the idea. This is worrying. normies don't have the information available to them to be critical of this. They really think all these news agencies are honest. Of course, you can easily filet it when you see it, but it's worrying.
I'm rapidly beginning to lose confidence in our ability to reach a compromise of some sort with these people.
Charles Stewart