During the election, Americans who were simply looking for
information got screwed by the media. The propaganda was so thick and
the fake polls were so numerous that people were reeling in shock when
Hillary Clinton actually ended up losing the election. Heck, I was
stunned myself, and I had even written
an article about my suspicion that the polls were fake.
The establishment media misquoted, edited video clips to tell a
different story, and made their bias so blatant that one site even put
an editorial disclaimer on every article that mentioned Donald Trump,
denouncing him as a xenophobic, homophobic blah blah blah. They created a
monster in Trump, and now people are out there destroying cities and
blocking ambulances because of it. As Noam Chomsky wrote in his
brilliant book,
Language and Politics:
You don’t have any other society where the educated
classes are so effectively indoctrinated and controlled by a subtle
propaganda system – a private system including media, intellectual
opinion forming magazines and the participation of the most highly
educated sections of the population. Such people ought to be referred to
as “Commissars” – for that is what their essential function is – to set
up and maintain a system of doctrines and beliefs which will undermine
independent thought and prevent a proper understanding and analysis of
national and global institutions, issues, and policies.
Despite the bias and the mindless followers breathlessly tweeting
every fear-laced, dishonest word, Donald Trump still ended up winning
the election. According to
Mac Slavo of SHTFplan, that is because of the power of alternative media.
One report after another being disseminated by what
left-leaning pundits call “fake news websites” has been confirmed as
accurate, proving that there was a concerted effort to stifle open
discourse and real journalism.
Hillary Clinton made mention of it in her Deplorables speech, warning
that a lot of fake information was being released through purported
“racist” web sites across the web.
And if she had her way, no one would have ever read anything but
positive information about her, while everything else was disappeared
Orwellian-style, never to reach the masses that eventually elected
Donald Trump to the Presidency.
What this year’s Presidential election has proven is that
alternative media is a force to be reckoned with, and the establishment
is scared sh*tless.
But they won’t let it happen again.
War has been declared – a war on fake news.
But guess who they’re really coming for?
Google and Facebook are on a mission to rid the world of “fake news”
But instead of starting with the New York Times,
whose publisher basically admitted that their coverage of the election was dishonest, they’re targeting alternative media – the very people who were the ones out there telling the truth during the election.
In fact, in a quote that is rich with irony, the aforementioned
NY Times said:
Google
kicked off the action on Monday afternoon when the Silicon Valley
search giant said it would ban websites that peddle fake news from using
its online advertising service. Hours later,
Facebook,
the social network, updated the language in its Facebook Audience
Network policy, which already says it will not display ads in sites that
show misleading or illegal content, to include fake news sites.
“We
have updated the policy to explicitly clarify that this applies to fake
news,” a Facebook spokesman said in a statement. “Our team will
continue to closely vet all prospective publishers and monitor existing
ones to ensure compliance.”
Taken together, the decisions were a clear signal that the tech behemoths could no longer ignore the
growing outcry over their power in distributing information to the American electorate.
Vox agrees that “
fake news” is a problem, and cites – I kid you not – an investigation by Buzzfeed
to prove their point.
a group of cynical Macedonian hucksters had created
dozens of right-wing news sites that publish low-quality pro-Trump news
stories. Some are plagiarized from other conservative news sites. Others
appear to be totally made up, with headlines like “Proof surfaces that
Obama was born in Kenya,” “Bill Clinton’s sex tape just leaked,” and
“Pope Francis forbids Catholics from voting for Hillary!”
“Yes, the info in the blogs is bad, false, and misleading
but the rationale is that ‘if it gets the people to click on it and
engage, then use it,’” a Macedonian student told BuzzFeed.
Other fake news is generated by partisan bloggers taking
news tidbits out of context and drawing totally wrong conclusions from
them. For example, some confused conservative bloggers misread a leaked
email from Clinton adviser John Podesta as evidence that
Democrats were manipulating public poll results.
In fact, Democrats were using a standard polling technique called
oversampling on Democrats’ own internal polls — but that didn’t stop the
story from spreading among online conservatives.
Since Facebook has already been busted
suppressing trending news if it supported a conservative point of view,
it’s no surprise to hear that they plan to do their best to suppress
whatever information they want by arbitrarily saying that it’s fake.
Vox feels that Facebook can
censor monitor the “truth” through algorithms.
Facebook can also add value at the opposite end of the
quality spectrum, by identifying articles that are thoughtful and
thoroughly reported (and publications with a track record of producing
such articles) and giving those an extra boost in the News Feed
algorithm.
An advantage of this approach is that it makes it less
necessary to make hard judgment calls about whether a particular article
is so fake that it needs to be blocked outright. Low-quality news
(whether outright hoaxes or just sloppy journalism) will just naturally
get less exposure because people will only see it after scrolling
through the higher-quality news their friends have shared.
I’m pretty sure we can all see where this is leading.
You’ll see what they want you to see. It’s already to the point at
which most people see very little from the pages they “like” on
Facebook. I have more than 25,000 readers on one of my pages and I’m
lucky if 1000 people see my posts.
They’ll hit non-approved websites where it hurts.
The goal is to hit the targeted websites where it hurts, in the owners’ wallets.
For example, many independent sites rely on Google Adsense to make a
little money. That way, the site can provide information at no cost to
you, the reader. And don’t think that we’re raking it in, either – once
Google has taken their cut isn’t that much. Running a small website does
not make you rich. Here’s what Google had to say about advertising
revenue.
“Moving forward, we will restrict ad serving on pages
that misrepresent, misstate, or conceal information about the publisher,
the publisher’s content, or the primary purpose of the web property,”
Google said in a statement. The company did not detail how it would
implement or enforce the new policy, which some accuse is the monetary
equivalent of censorship.
The shifts comes as Google, Facebook and Twitter face a backlash over
the role they played in the U.S. presidential election by allowing the
spread of false and often malicious information that might have swayed
voters toward Republican candidate Donald Trump. Of course, others have
repeatedly accused both Google (which chairman Eric Schmidt’s
collaboration with the Clinton campaign was revealed courtesy of the
Podesta emails), and Facebook of doing everything in their power to
promote a Clinton win, so the narrative is not exactly clear on this
one. (source)
As for Facebook, they will disallow ads, which can be highly lucrative, to certain sites.
Fortune reports:
“We do not integrate or display ads in apps or sites
containing content that is illegal, misleading or deceptive, which
includes fake news,” Facebook said in a statement, adding that it will
continue to vet publishers to ensure compliance.
This follows closely in the footsteps of YouTube, which has removed
the right to have ads on any content that is “sensitive” or
“controversial.”
Mac Slavo writes:
The moves by Google and Facebook follow a recent de-monetzation effort at Youtube
that has also targeted alternative media. As noted in their “Advertiser
Friendly Content Guidelines,” they appear to be targeting exactly the
issues often covered by alternative media by directly banning:
Content that is considered “not advertiser-friendly” includes, but is not limited to:
Controversial or sensitive subjects and events, including
subjects related to war, political conflicts, natural disasters and
tragedies, even if graphic imagery is not shown
So basically, anything newsworthy is no longer advertiser friendly,
and these organizations will now determine whose news will or won’t be
seen based on what is sure to be proprietary algorithms and secretive
human curation.
If Google, Facebook, and YouTube have their way, anyone reporting
information outside the party line will be considered “fake,” and
they’ll work hard to starve out the bloggers, vloggers, and citizen
journalists who are providing an alternative point of view.
The bottom line is this: the time and energy required to
produce the amount of video content and investigative journalism that we
saw during the election is astronomical. Thousands of journalists,
bloggers and concerned citizens spent countless hours reporting the news
the mainstream media wouldn’t. Many of those people depend on
advertising revenue to cover their most basic website maintenance costs,
as well as their monthly mortgages and the food they put on their
dinner tables.
The aim with policies like this, which will no doubt be overseen by
establishment hacks, is to quite literally starve independent media. In
turn, they will starve the people of the information they so desperately
need to understand what is being done to them. (source)
How do Google and Facebook plan to become the arbiters of truth?
First, let’s define “arbiter.”
ar·bi·ter
ˈärbədər/
noun
plural noun: arbiters
-
a person who settles a dispute or has ultimate authority in a matter.
“the military acted as arbiter of conflicts between political groups”
-
a person whose views or actions have great influence over trends in social behavior.
“an arbiter of taste”
Google and Facebook plan to become those ultimate authorities, but
they have have not pointed out exactly what they regard as fake news.
I have questions.
- If it differs with their desired bias, does that make it fake?
- Will opinion pieces be classed as propaganda if they veer too far from the mainstream party line?
- Is all subject matter classed as propaganda considered fake?
- Will all stories about a liberal-beloved candidate like Hillary Clinton be considered a lie if they are critical?
- Did we actually go to bed in America and wake up in North Korea?
I suspect they’ll work hand in hand with other mainstream sites to villainize those who aren’t playing ball with the team.
When you see the exact same wording repeated over and over, generally
it’s a “talking point” that someone has informed the media they are to
emphasize. Have you ever noticed phrases like “an abundance of caution”
or “for your own safety” getting used over and over? It’s a talking
point, and the collusive media is using it as a propaganda tool. Never
trust a talking point.
The new talking point is going to be “fake news.”
Here’s an example of someone getting on board the Fake News Train
already, but to put it in perspective, it ran right alongside one
referencing a “
cabinet of deplorables.”
Imagining a Donald Trump presidency pushes the bounds of
creative thought, even as it becomes more concrete during these months
of transition. Given Trump’s epic disinterest in the minutiae of actual
governing – the threat of his authoritarianism is all vindictiveness, no
on-time trains – it becomes more important than ever to track the way
he staffs the 4,000 positions under his control.
And early signs indicate it will be rife with deplorables.
Now that we have established that blatant bias,
US News and World Report felt obligated to provide a list of websites that should be avoided “at all costs.”

I spoke to a representative from one of the sites mentioned,
Activist Post, who said:
The establishment seems desperate to regain control of
the narrative after independent news outlets on this list appear to have
tipped the election to Trump.
We believe that we’re being unfairly lumped in with deliberately
fake websites like The Onion in an attempt to discredit alternative
viewpoints of current events.
Another list put together by Melissa Zimdars, whose bio says she is ” an
assistant professor of communication & media” calls the following websites “
False, Misleading, Clickbait-y, and Satirical “News” Sources.”
| 100PercentFedUp.com (2,3) |
EnduringVision.com (1) |
PakAlertPress.com |
| 21stCenturyWire.com (2, 3) |
FPRNradio.com |
PoliticalBlindSpot.com |
| 70news.wordpress.com (1) |
The Free Thought Project (3) |
PoliticalEars.com |
| Abcnews.com.co (1) |
GeoEngineeringWatch.org |
Politicalo (1) |
| ActivistPost.com (2, 3) |
*Website Removed* (temporarily) |
PoliticusUSA |
| Addicting Info (3) |
GovtSlaves.info |
PrisonPlanet.com |
| AmericanNews.com (1) |
GulagBound.com |
PrisonPlanet.tv |
| AnonNews.co (3) |
HangTheBankers.com |
Private-eye.co.uk (includes 4) |
| Associated Media Coverage |
HumansAreFree.com |
ProjectVeritas |
| BeforeItsNews.com |
Huzlers (4) |
*Website Removed* (temporarily) |
| Being Liberal |
IfYouOnlyNews |
React 365 |
| BigAmericanNews.com |
Indecision Forever (1) |
RealFarmacy.com |
| BigPZone.com |
IJR (Independent Journal Review) |
RealNewsRightNow.com (1, 4) |
| Bipartisan Report (3) |
InfoWars (1, 2) |
RedFlagNews.com |
| BizPac Review |
Infowars.com |
Red State (3) |
| Blue Nation Review (2,3) |
IntelliHub.com |
Reductress (4) |
| Breitbart (2, 3) |
Inquisitr.com |
RileNews.com (1, 4) |
| Call the Cops (4) |
JonesReport.com |
Satira Tribune |
| Cap News (4) |
LewRockwell.com |
Sprotspickle.com (4) |
| ChristWire.org (4) |
Liberal America |
The Blaze |
| Chronicle.su |
LibertyTalk.fm |
The Free Thought Project (3) |
| CivicTribune.com (1) |
LibertyUnyielding |
Borowitz Report (4) |
| ClickHole.com (4) |
LibertyVideos.org |
The Onion (4) |
| CoastToCoastAM.com (2) |
LMR/LibertyMovementRadio.com |
The Other 98% (3) |
| CollectiveEvolution (3) |
MediaMass.net (1) |
The Reporterz |
| ConsciousLifeNews.com (2) |
MegynKelly.us (1) |
The Stately Harold |
| ConservativeOutfitters.com (2) |
MSNBC.com.co (1) |
TheDailySheeple.com |
| ConspiracyWire (WideAwakeAmerica.com) (2) |
MSNBC.website (1) |
TheNewsNerd.com |
| CountdownToZeroTime.com (2) |
Naha Daily (4) |
TheRunDownLive.com |
| CounterPsyOps.com |
National Report |
TheUsPatriot.com |
| *Website Removed* (temporarily) |
NationalReport.net (1) |
TruthFrequencyRadio.com |
| CreamBMP.com (1) |
NaturalNews.com |
Twitchy.com (3) |
| DailyBuzzLive.com |
NC Scooper |
UnconfirmedSources.com |
| DailyCurrant.com |
NCT (New Century Times) |
*Website Removed* (temporarily) |
| *Website Removed* (temporarily) |
News Examiner |
USA Supreme |
| Daily Wire |
News-Hound.com (1) |
US.Blasting.News |
| DCClothesLine.com |
NewsBiscuit.com (1) |
US Uncut (3) |
| DCGazette.com (1) |
Newslo (1, 4) |
VeteransToday.com |
| DerfMagazine.com |
NewsMutiny.com (1, 4) |
*Website Removed*(temporarily) |
| Disclose.tv |
Newswatch 28 |
WakingUpWisconsin.com |
| DrudgeReport.com.co (1) |
Newswatch 33 |
Winning Democrats |
| DuffleBlog.com (4) |
NewsWire-24.com |
WitScience.org |
| DuhProgressive.com |
NoDisInfo.com |
World Net Daily |
| Embols.com |
Now8News |
World News Daily Report (4) |
| Empire Herald |
NowTheEndBegins.com |
WorldTruth.tv |
| Empire News (1) |
Occupy Democrats (3) |
ZeroHedge |
| EmpireNews.com |
|
|
| Endingthefed.com |
|
|
It’s important to note that the author of the list above recommends
some of the most notably biased liberal publications around as
trustworthy.
She writes:
Some people are asking which news sources I trust, and
all I can say is that I read/watch/listen very widely, from mainstream,
corporate owned sources (The New York Times, The Washington Post, The
Boston Globe, The Wall Street Journal, Forbes) as well as The Atlantic,
National Public Radio, and various local and alternative sources with
different political perspectives, some of which are included on this
list.
If you thought the propaganda controlling the minds of the masses was bad before, just wait. You ain’t seen nothin’ yet.
Article posted with permission from
DaisyLuther.com
http://freedomoutpost.com/google-and-facebook-will-be-arbiters-of-truth-in-the-war-on-fake-news/