Fact is, Social Media platforms can regulate and control what's presented on their platforms. And they can do so without violating the 1st amendment where "Congress shall make no laws..." Until the government gets involved/interferes, the 1st is intact.
But it raises some interesting questions that, IMO, need answers. A lot of communication these days is done over social media, particularly with covid restricting face to face time.
Take a hypothetical. What if T-mobile started "fact checking" and banning certain conversations and texts? How is that different? Would people accept that as easily as many accept the controls on Facebook/Twitter?
My youngest son told us his account on Facebook was just suspended for a day ....24 hours, for making, what he thought was a harmless joke
He said he used the word ars and maybe that was a factor.it would be interesting to know more about how they apply censorship.
I would be very oncerned if this morphed into censoring people who have views that don’t line up with the mainstream climate crisis narrative.
I would be very concerned if this morphed into censoring people who have views that don’t line up with the mainstream climate crisis narrative
Not sure if it does or not, but looking at the current situation, it certainly could. The "Fact Checkers" routinely rely on the mainstream media narrative. Use "Election" in a post on Facebook in any context and a "Fact Check" will be attached.
Note: Just checked and there is "Real Concern" that FaceBook treats climate discussion as Opinion and therefore does not apply "fact checking", leaving a "Huge Loophole" for climate deniers. (Thats from the NYT article on the subject). Probably just a matter of time.
there ya go "opinion" that a scary thought////a prisoner down in the commy cell, being beaten and tortured until he admits finally that 2 +2 is really 5
By keeping the public in the dark, federal agencies create an environment where inaction is justified.
"However, climate denial hasn’t stopped agencies from addressing present impacts. In fact, only two days after the FEMA strategic plan was published, the agency approved a $1.7 million grant to relocate Alaskan climate refugees, who are losing their homes as melting sea ice, thawing permafrost, and rising sea levels combine to erode coastlines"
metmike: They are exactly 100% wrong! In the higher latitudes, the land is rising much faster than the seas from glacial rebound(including all of Alaska) and coastlines are ADDING land.
Going to another source below, they are doing the same thing as mainstream science has totally colluded on this narrative. Even when the article itself recognizes and shows seas sinking, they tell us and show us that somehow, this trend will suddenly reverse and seas will be going up for the next 100 years..........because the simulations using busted, too warm models are programmed to show this.
The article, written by a believer in the climate crisis ignores the actual data and instead believes the busted models.....computer simulations that have been too warm for 30+ years.
Here's the computer simulated forecast from their story, which they tell us will be happening as if its a fact. Note that seas were supposed to be rising in 2016+ after they published this article. Note, Sitka is supposed to see, sea levels go 10 inches higher between 2016 to 2050 in their forecast below.
Here's the real measurement of the real sea and real land from the real planet in the same state, Alaska over the last 70 years. Sea levels have actually DROPPED over 30 inches during that time frame.
Here's the actual empirical data/measurement at this exact site, Sitka, AK. The climate crisis advocates were wrong for over 30 years before this article was written in 2016 and now we can add another 4 years of being wrong since it came out.
metmike: Here is the real reason for the sea levels to be falling(with respect to land) in Alaska:
Post-glacial rebound (also called isostatic rebound or crustal rebound) is the rise of land masses after the removal of the huge weight of ice sheets during the last glacial period, which had caused isostatic depression. Post-glacial rebound and isostatic depression are phases of glacial isostasy (glacial isostatic adjustment, glacioisostasy), the deformation of the Earth's crust in response to changes in ice mass distribution. The direct raising effects of post-glacial rebound are readily apparent in parts of Northern Eurasia, Northern America, Patagonia, and Antarctica. However, through the processes of ocean siphoning and continental levering, the effects of post-glacial rebound on sea level are felt globally far from the locations of current and former ice sheets
So you might wonder........."why are we only hearing from one side on this? While the other side, absurdly even claims that they are the ones being censored in the first article?
It's just part of the strategy to make you think that there is a crisis and the only reason you don't fully appreciate it, is that powerful forces are preventing them from telling you the truth about it.
Which is exactly what THEY are doing.
You just saw it on the last 2 pages.
I challenge anybody to show examples of how the fake climate crisis is being censored by anybody that has any influence. It's constantly saturating every nook and cranny in the communication world with impunity.
Sources that show anything different are the ones that struggle to get any coverage....or government/private funding.
The climate crisis is worth trillions of dollars for governments, scientists and others.
Messages that get in the way of that are being increasingly vilified and censored.