Category Archives: Censorship

Today, pretty much everyone with access to the Internet has an outlet to express their own or take a look at others views and opinions through personal blogs, online forums and even the comment sections on Instagram or Youtube.

A quick scroll through the tweets under a trending Twitter topic reveals many opinions (unified at times, divided at others) concerning the latest events and affairs. These range from social and political issues to the latest happenings in pop culture.

However, individual posts rarely have the power to influence widespread public opinion. This influence lies with massive media conglomerates, which control a myriad of media sources such as TV channels, publishing houses and film studios. Over time, control over mass media has become concentrated into the hands of just a few corporations.

For example, Comcast, one of the biggest media conglomerates in the US and worldwide, owns DreamWorks Animation, NBC (including NBC News and SNL), Universal Parks and Resorts, and Xfinity, among other things.

This becomes an issue when you think about how much of the media consumed by people on a daily basis is controlled by one single corporation.

Just withholding a few details of a story or embellishing others is enough to sway public opinion. As the subsidiaries, or the individual companies, are controlled by one big holding company, if they wanted to push or restrict the spread of a specific ideology, then a whole wave of media would also go along with it.

These days, political censorship is a prevalent topic. In the US, Democrats and Republicans are constantly feuding over policies and polarized beliefs. Both sides warn the public of the dangers of the beliefs of those who lean far-right and far-left to push their agendas and inhibit the other partys.

News companies publish articles with shocking headlines and broadcast reports discussing controversial topics to sway the people reading or watching into siding against the other side of the argument without considering both sides equally.

News sites can be sorted into different ranges, like those measuring amounts of bias (from reporting facts to fabricating information) and political alignment. Generally, a source with as little bias as possible with less association with any political party is desirable for reliable facts that are not distorted in any way.

But everyones interpretation of these things is different, and charts that can be found online are made with bias. Therefore, it is difficult to have a concrete map of reliable versus unreliable news sources, but a few comparisons of different charts will tell you the general orientation of the news sites on the ranges.

One example of media censorship in recent years is the banning of all of Former President Donald Trumps social media accounts. The platforms involved have stated their reasons for doing so, as the posts he frequently made violated their terms of service. Additionally, they believed his platform aided in the inciting of the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, and further access to social media could cause more potential violence.

However, this is still restricting an individuals free speech and can be viewed as unjust. According to an article published by Pew Research Center, 49 percent of Americans believed that Trumps accounts should be permanently banned, while half thought that they should not.

The opinions on this case are deeply divided, as with many other cases of media censorship. Politics is also involved, as in Trumps case, liberals were more likely to favor the deletion of his accounts while conservatives denounced it.

Another example of suppression in the media that is not political is the censoring of photos deemed obscene, or pornography. This is sometimes necessary, as in case those photos were posted or taken without consent, they will be taken down. Children on the internet will also be prevented from seeing obscene photos freely posted on social media sites.

Although censorship in this case can protect peoples safety, it also affects others ability to freely express themselves. People who see their content as a valid and acceptable form of artistic expression are being restricted, as well as adult content creators who make a living off these photos.

Censorship is also not limited to occurring at the hands of huge media companies. In many countries around the world, the government is involved in the surveillance and censoring of their citizens on the internet, either to spread propaganda/promote their ideology or to silence those with political views opposite of their leaders. North Korea, China and Iran are among the most censored countries in the world.

Citizens of these countries rely on VPNs (which are oftentimes illegal) to gain greater access to bypass internet restrictions. VPNs are common in China and Iran, but in North Korea where internet access is extremely limited, people tune their radios to forbidden broadcasts and smuggle South Korean drama and music for a brief glimpse at the outside world.

So, is it right to censor?

Those who censor often argue that it is for the greater good, though it often silences or limits others, possibly a minority population, in the process. Censorship in the media can keep us safe from malicious posters, but can also be used by news channels to twist public perception and push people towards specific ideals. Huge conglomerates have control over the media, and when reporting on events, their voices are so loud that they become the only ones we hear.

Link:
How corporations influence our entertainment (and therefore our opinions) - The Tide

The Godfather Charles Wright was on this weeks episode of Insight with Chris Van Vliet to talk about his pro wrestling career including a lengthy stint in WWE. Here are the highlights:

The Right to Censor gimmick:

I hated it. As soon as they told me what I was doing, that was why you would see me come and go all the time, he shared. I always had the strip clubs here in Vegas, so I always had means of making money. So when I was not having fun and not making money, I would leave. I would go to Vince and I would say, Hey Vince, its time for me to go. He would just laugh and say, Okay, Charles. Well call you in a year or so and see if you want to come back. That is how it would go.

How he got the girls to appear on TV for his Godfather gimmick:

Vince said to me, Charles, do you think you could go and get girls? Im like, Vince, are you joking? Me and Taker are in the strip clubs every night.

So I go and grab The Undertaker, and we go to the strip club, this is during the day, we grab 3 or 4 girls and take them back to the WWF, they sign them, pay them, we take them on TV and they (WWE) doesnt ask me anything, just tell me to do what you do, he said.

I swear I went from walking through an airport and maybe some people noticed you, to the next day, people are like, Godfather, where are the hos? It got over the second it got on TV.

H/T to WrestlingNews.co for the transcription

See the original post:
The Godfather Says He Hated Right To Censor Gimmick, Talks How He Would Get Women For His Entrance - Wrestling Headlines

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., argues that the Democrats have done nothing to introduce the spending bill to Republicans.

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., penned an op-ed Monday announcing hes embarking on anexodus from Big Tech, starting with YouTube, over what he describes as rampant censorship and an "almost religious adherence to the edicts of government bureaucrats."

"Many in Congress, on the Left and the Right, want to break up or regulate Big Tech, but few of these loud voices have actually stepped up and quit using Big Tech," Paul wrote in a piece for the Washington Examiner. "So today, I announce that I will begin an exodus from Big Tech. I will no longer post videos on YouTube unless it is to criticize them or announce that viewers can see my content on rumble.com."

RUMBLE GOING PUBLIC IN CHALLENGE TO 'BIG TECH'

"Why begin with YouTube? Because theyre the worst censors," he added.

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., on Dec. 13, 2021 in Washington, D.C. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

Paul complained that whenever he posts content that challenges the current White House narrative concerning the COVID-19 pandemic, no matter how well sourced and researched, YouTube deletes the videos. He saw his account suspended for a week in August for violating the sites COVID-19 misinformation policy over a video claiming surgical masks and cloth masks dont protect against the coronavirus.

"The gall to delete constitutionally protected speech!" Paul wrote Monday. "It is indeed ironic that the censors likely think of themselves as progressive but their actions are more suggestive of the diktats of the Medieval church. Think about it. In the U.S. in 2021, you are being told there are ideas or opinions that are too dangerous for you to see. It is disinformation they admonish, so if you want to stay on their platforms you must conform to their approved opinions."

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., questions National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Anthony Fauci on Nov. 4, 2021 in Washington, D.C. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE ON FOX BUSINESS

Paul said he may still post a video or two in the future only to decry YouTubes censorship and promote its competing platforms, but that his plan is to eventually quit Big Tech altogether and take his business elsewhere, and he encouraged others to do the same. He also said he created a libertarian news aggregator site called libertytree.com.

"About half of the public leans right," he wrote. "If we all took our messaging to outlets of free exchange, we could cripple Big Tech in a heartbeat. So, today I take my first step toward denying my content to Big Tech. Hopefully, other liberty lovers will follow."

More:
Rand Paul quits YouTube, citing censorship | Fox Business

Blogging platform Tumblr, once a powerhouse of content for millennials, has censored a wide swathe of hashtags on its Apple iOS app, in what the social media company says is an effort to remain within the Apple App Stores community guidelines. Some of the censored terms include girl, suicide prevention, and testicular cancer.

According to a list compiled by a Tumblr user, the censorship extends to seemingly-mundane hashtags.

Millennials in a Tumblr photobooth (Mat Hayward/Getty)

Apple CEO Tim Cook and his V for Victory (Kevin Dietsch/Getty)

Via the Verge:

Another Tumblr user, aptly named bannedtags, has been keeping track of all the blocked tags in a Google Doc. The user notes that most of these tags have been banned on iOS not on all devices and that the listed tags are subject to change. Some banned tags are blatantly related to sexual, violent, or harmful content, but others dont seem to belong on the list, and may actually do more harm than good by staying on it.

For example, girl, sad, and oddly enough, Alec Lightwood, an actor from the show Shadowhunters, has been banned (because even Tumblr cant handle those eyes). Single dad, single mom, single parent, suicide prevention, and testicular cancer are also on the list, potentially harming those who want to seek support in any of these areas.

To make things even weirder, Tumblr blacklisted some tags that basically function as unspoken social cues on the site. Me and my face are blocked, both of which are tags that bloggers use to label their selfies (oh, and did I forget to mention that selfie is banned, too?). The platform appears to have blocked queue as well, a tag thats typically applied to posts that were placed in a queue and serves as a signal to followers that they may not be online at the moment.

Apple and Google, which control approximately 99 percent of the market share in operating systems for mobile devices worldwide, operate an effective duopoly on access to smartphones.

While it is possible to install apps on Android devices without going through the Google Play Store, it is not possible to install apps on iOS devices without going through the App Store, meaning that a ban from the App Store means total loss of access to the market of iOS users.

Allum Bokhari is the senior technology correspondent at Breitbart News.He is the author of#DELETED: Big Techs Battle to Erase the Trump Movement and Steal The Election.

Read the original:
Tumblr Escalates Censorship to Placate Apple

On Wednesday, a Tennessee county school board pulled "Maus" Art Spiegelman's award-winning graphic novel about the Holocaust from its eighth-grade curriculum, sparking outrage amongst liberals who accused the board of engaging in censorship. But on Thursday, commentators online attempted to push back against this narrative by downplaying the board's vote and accusing the left of apparent hypocrisy.

To make their point, many critics pointed tominutestaken by the McMinn County Board of Education during its meeting on earlier this month, arguing that the board was not motivated by antisemitism but concerns over instances of obscenity and nudity. Throughout the transcript, board members made such objections, claiming that the book was inappropriate for the classroom.

As Lee Parkison, Director of School, said during the meeting, "there is some rough, objectionable language in this book," noting that the board could redact key lines.Still, other members, like Tony Allman, clearly took issue with the novel's visual depictions of Nazi atrocities. "It shows people hanging," Allman said. "It shows them killing kids."

RELATED: "Orwellian": Tennessee school board sparks outrage with vote to ban Holocaust graphic novel "Maus"

"Why does the educational system promote this kind of stuff?" he asked. "It is not wise or healthy."

Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.

Jeff Trexler, Interim Director of the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund, who read the board's minutes, told Salon that the school officials completely misread the novel.

"To say that Maus promotes violent abuse and dehumanizing language is to show that you don't understand it," Trexler said. "Schools are supposed to be in the business of promoting literacy, and this is just one example of how school leaders are using their own illiteracy as justification for keeping children from learning what the adults in charge have not."

Some commentators also took issue with the use of the word "ban" to describe the school board's decision, contending that it is a misnomer given that McMinn County simply nixed the "Maus" from its eighth-grade curriculum.

But Jonathan Friedman, director of free expression and education at PEN America, said that he doesn't think the term "is reductive at all."

Pointing to a piece he wrote last year, Friedman reiterated that "the American Library Association and other advocates for the freedom to read" have "long considered" curricular and library removals as "efforts to ban books from circulation, to effectively disallow and discourage others to read them."

RELATED: Book banning fever heats up in red states

At the same time, many critics viewed liberal outrage over the board's vote through the lens of "leftist hypocrisy," noting that books like Harper Lee's "To Kill a Mockingbird" and Mark Twain's "Huckleberry Finn" have been restricted in the past over accusations of racism.

Earlier this week, Mukilteo School Board in Washington state voted to remove "To Kill a Mockingbird" from its ninth-grade required reading, though the board granted discretion to individual teachers who wanted to use the novel in their curricula.

In the past, Friedman noted, PEN America has pushed back on schools looking to pull "To Kill a Mockingbird" from course curricula, writing in 2020 that the novel "[deals] with difficult subject matter from our country's complicated and painful history, including systemic racism." Still, he noted that most of the book bans we're seeing are being leveled against LGBTQ+ authors, authors of color, and books that deal with race, sex, and gender.

"The challenge right now is to recognize that the weight of the momentum here is so very clearly swinging in one direction," Friedman said.

Thus far, McMinn is the first known county to pull "Maus" from its students' curricula. It remains unclear whether the book will see more restrictions throughout the rest of the country, though it's possible, given that other districts have had the tendency to target the same authors and works.

Andrea Pitzer, who wrote "A Global History of Concentration Camps," said that it's important for kids to be exposed to books like "Maus" when "so much of the language of conspiracy theories swirling around the country today from QAnon to anti-vaxx and anti-democratic movements rises out of antisemitic literature used in the past to devastating ends.

"The county that handed down the decision about MAUS is in Tennessee, which also passed a law not long ago that may allow publicly funded adoption agencies to discriminate on the basis of religion," she added. "Last week, we saw stories about a lawsuit filed by a Jewish couple saying they were refused as clients at one agency in the state because of their religion. When you include the kind of synagogue violence we've seen recently in Texas and Pittsburgh, it makes for a frightening trend. This isn't some isolated, abstract situation it's part of a larger, concrete phenomenon."

Read more from the original source:
Why experts say the banning of "Maus" is not like the censorship of "Huckleberry Finn" - Salon

Sailor Moon started as a serialized manga anthology that ran from 1991-1997, written and illustrated by Naoko Takeuchi (TokiMeca!). Due to its immense popularity, it was adapted into an anime series in 1992 that ran until 1997. Sailor Moon did not premiere in North America until 1995 however, the North American licensing and dub came with many unexpected changes.

One of the biggest and most evident changes was the Americanization of names. From the main characters to the villains, all their names were changed: Sailor Moons name changed from Usagi to Serena, Mercurys from Ami to Amy, Marss from Rei to Raye, Jupiters from Makoto to Lita, Venuss from Minako to Mina, Neptunes from Michiru to Michelle, Uranuss from Haruka to Amara and, lastly, Tuxedo Masks from Mamoru Chiba to Darien Shields. Apart from renaming characters, the American broadcasters also attempted to Americanize the show on a larger scale by removing many of the references to Japanese culture, both in the dub and in the animation itself. Kanji writing was edited out of the background of many frames, and shots of roads would even be flipped to match right-hand American traffic. Seemingly, the American version attempted to erase the seriess ties to Japan as a whole.

Other censored material wasexpected, such as nudity and violence. This aspect was very consistent. During the Sailor Scout transformation sequences, you can see silhouettes of their nude bodies. Those scenes would be reanimated to remove the definition on breasts, as well as make them smaller. This would also be done for the many bathtub scenes in the show. The water level would be raised or made more opaque to avoid showing the girls bodies. In terms of censoring violence, blood would oftentimes be edited out by changing the color from red to green. The dub would avoid using the word death, and the scenes portraying direct violence would simply be cut from the episode. These changes were more understandable, especially since Sailor Moon was being advertised as a kids show on channels like Cartoon Network, which at the time were airing shows such as Powerpuff Girls and Dexters Laboratory.

One of the most mentioned features when discussing the Western censorship of Sailor Moon is the erasure of the shows queer characters. This was first done in the very first season with the characters Zoisite and Kunzite, who are a part of a group called Shitennou, or The Four Heavenly Kings, who all serve under Queen Beryl, a would-be conqueror of the Moon Kingdom. The original series heavily implied they had aromantic relationship. In the American version, Zoisite is changed from a male character to a female character most likely in an effort to avoid backlash from parents for showing a gay relationship in a childrens show. This once again happened in season four with a character named Fish Eye. Fish Eye was a part of a group called the Amazon Trio. The three were originally all animals, but they were turned into humans by their leader in exchange for capturing a Pegasus that was hiding in peoples dreams. The original manga and anime features Fish Eye as a male character who dresses in a feminine way and pursues many men during their run in the show (it is unclear whether Fish Eye identifies as a woman). This was censored by giving Fish Eye a female voice actress and removing all references to Fish Eye being male.

Another significant example of censorship was the depiction of the relationship between two Sailor Scouts. In both the anime and manga, it is very clear that Sailor Neptune and Sailor Uranus, Michiru and Haruka, are in a romantic relationship. This relationship was censored in many other countries in different ways in the U.S., their relationship was changed from being girlfriends to cousins. Yes, it is just as uncomfortable as it sounds. Other countries kept their status as a romantic couple but made Sailor Uranus a male character. This was also done with the Sailor Starlights. Many Western fans do not know about them because the season they premiered during was never dubbed. Fans theorize that this happened because the Sailor Starlights, Taiki Kou, Seiya Kou and Yaten Kou, present as male in their civilian form, but in their transformations become female. In reality, though, it was mainly due to licensing issues.

All of these things were changed, but why are they so important? To put it plainly, it is a disservice to both the fans of the series and the original work itself; censoring nudity or blooddoesnt affect much, but removal of entire scenes and drastic changes to character dynamics affect so much more than just the aesthetic: it takes away from the narrative and makes the show confusing at times. By limiting the story, it becomes a disservice to the original animators and Naoko Takeuchi. Its also a disservice to a lot of Western fans of the series who were never able to get the full experience of the story. I personally never even realized the extent of censorship in the show until much later, when meme videos of the old dub started becoming popular on YouTube, showing the absurd lengths the American dub would go to censor violence and relationships. It was almost comical at times.

However, all is not lost: VIZ Media came out with a brand-new dub airing between 2014 and 2016. This new version kept the original Japanese names of the characters. Additionally, this time none of the content previously deemed to be inappropriate was cut. This includes the violence, blood and queer characters. Finally, those who cant read subtitles or simply prefer dubs can watch Sailor Moon withoutfear they are missing out on anything from the series.

Daily Arts Writer K. Rodriguez-Garcia can be reached at karodrig@umich.edu.

Link:
A short history of 'Sailor Moon' and censorship in America. - The Michigan Daily

By Phil Lawler (bio - articles - email) | Jan 25, 2022

Massive convoys of trucks are converging on the nations capital. About 50,000 truckers are involved. In one place the convoy stretches more than 40 milesand thats before the separate convoys, coming from different corners of the nation, meet for their final approach. Tens of thousands of people are lining the highways to show their support; women are bringing hot meals out to the truckers when they stop to rest.

Doesnt that sound like a news story to you? Its happening right now in Canada. But you probably havent read it in your local newspaper; you certainly havent seen it covered on the major-network reports.

If the truckers were protesting gender discrimination, or even the rising cost of diesel fuel, this protestwhich produces some very dramatic visual imageswould lead the nightly TV newscasts. But the Freedom Convoy is protesting Covid-lockdown restrictions, and the major media have very obviously resolved to spike stories about any such protests. And so Silence.

Oh, I was able, with a bit of extra digging, to find a reasonably accurate Reuters story about the convoy. And CBC allowed that hundreds of truckers were protesting. But if you want any details at all, you need to look to non-traditional news providers, such as our friends at LifeSite News.

The mainstream media are not providing the news here; quite on the contrary they are deliberately suppressing the spread of public information. This is not a new phenomenon, of course; I have frequently commented on the curious blindness that afflicts reporters in Washington, DC every January, so that they do not notice the March for Life. But that willful blindness is now spreading, so that journalists ignore any developments of which their editors do not approve. Moreover, the self-appointed censors of social-media platforms do their best to shield readers from any facts that leak through the ever-tighter net.

And the major media are not alone in their campaign to restrict the flow of information. The same problem is very much in evidence in the field of educationespecially higher education. (See Jordan Petersons explanation of why he finds it morally untenable to remain on the faculty of a major university.

We can complainwe often have complainedabout liberal bias, in the media and in academe. But those complaints, too, are filtered out of mainstream conversations; they reach only those who are already inclined to agree, those who are open to alternate views. The fundamental problem, as Peterson explains, is that alternate views are actively suppressed, with increasing vigor and without apology.

Critics of the mainstream media outlets sometimes refer to them as the legacy media. The term is apt, I think. Like the fortunate offspring of wealthy families, these outlets have inherited powerful positions, built on the work of prior generations. Those prior generations amassed their influence by providing the public with information. The current leaders of the legacy media have abandoned that effort. Rather than giving people accurate information, and trusting responsible adults to form their own opinions, the mainstream media are now determined to shape opinions directly, telling people what they must think, suppressing contrary evidence and dissenting opinion. Today the most interesting news coverage is provided by upstart services, struggling to find an audience.

Complaints about media bias have very little impact. They, too, are filtered out of mainstream conversations, so that they reach only those people who already agree.

First, refuse to support the institutions that suppress the free flow of information. Insofar as possible, do not give them subscriptions, or tuition, or even attention.

Next, explore the alternatives. Not all of the new online sources of information are reliable; some discernment is necessary. Compare different accounts, and notice which outlets provide coverage that holds up to scrutiny. But do not be frightened away from new outlets simply because they are scorned by the legacy media.

Third and most important, inform your friends. And not only your Facebook friends, who may or may not actually be your real-life acquaintances. Share the news directly. Face-to-face conversations are always best, but email works well, too. Keep in mind that the internet was designed precisely to allow remote communications among people with shared interests. If the social-media giants thwart your efforts to share information, find other routes.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and his heroic allies showed how underground communicationssamizdatcould build a movement powerful enough to topple a political monolith. As the Soviet empire collapsed, the bid to control the spread of information will collapse, too. Facts, as John Adams said, are stubborn things. The truth will out.

Phil Lawler has been a Catholic journalist for more than 30 years. He has edited several Catholic magazines and written eight books. Founder of Catholic World News, he is the news director and lead analyst at CatholicCulture.org. See full bio.

Sound Off! CatholicCulture.org supporters weigh in.

All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a current donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!

Originally posted here:
Censorship and samizdat on the internet - Catholic Culture

Devin Nunes, the CEO of Trumps TRUTH network, a former California politician who once sued an imaginary cow over a Twitter beef, recently declared that the upcoming conservative conversation chamber would be the most family-friendly of all social media sites.

In order to accomplish this, Nunes says the companys hired the same artificial intelligence moderation firm as OnlyFans.

Yes MAGA fans, Trumps TRUTH will be censored using the same technology as every other social media site.

Oh the irony: Hive, the AI firm in question, serves numerous high-profile clients including Reddit, Parler, and the aforementioned OnlyFans. And, according to its own website, its very good at censoring posts that break its clients terms of service.

Per a report from Fox Business:

Hive co-founder and CEO Kevin Guo told Fox Business that his companys AI model will be used for TRUTH Social to offer content moderation for posts to ensure sexually-explicit content, and posts that include violence, bullying, hate speech, and spam never make it to the platform.

Playing devils advocate: Banning sexually-explicit content and posts that include violence we understand. But who gets to decide what is and isnt bullying, hate-speech, or spam?

Choosing Devin Nunes to both run the company as CEO and rule over its content with an iron fist as censorship czar seems like a bold choice. The entire premise of TRUTH, is built around free speech and the free exchange of ideas unfettered by censorship.

Nunes is well-known in conservative circles as being a die-hard Trump ally. But hes perhaps best known for being the guy who spent years trying to sue an imaginary cow and a parody of his mom on Twitter.

In a $250 million lawsuit, the California conservative claimed the parody accounts had defamed him.

Per a report from the Washington Post:

Heres a sampling of the tweets he alleges are defamatory, using language directly from the lawsuit Fox obtained:

Devin Nunes cow has made, published and republished hundreds of false and defamatory statements of and concerning Nunes, including the following: Nunes is a treasonous cowpoke.

Devins boots are full of manure. Hes udder-ly worthless and its pasture time to move him to prison.

In her endless barrage of tweets, Devin Nunes Mom maliciously attacked every aspect of Nunes character, honesty, integrity, ethics and fitness to perform his duties as a United States Congressman.

@DevinNunesMom falsely stated that Nunes was unfit to run the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

@DevinNunesMom falsely stated that Nunes was voted Most Likely to Commit Treason in high school.

@DevinNunesMom falsely claimed that Nunes would probably see an indictment before 2020.

He seems fun: Between the AI-powered censorship (which is demonstrably more prone to bias and negative outcomes than human moderators) and Nunes apparent belief that mocking him should carry a $250 million penalty, its going to be hilarious watching TRUTHs content moderation strategy play out.

Unfortunately for right wingers who believe Free Speech somehow means a private company is forced to host their rhetoric, the dream of uncensored social media remains unrealized and it doesnt appear as though Trumps latest grift effort will change that.

One need look no further than its closest cousin, GETTR, which was founded by ardent Trump sycophant Jason Miller.

GETTR became the belle of the conservative ball when podcaster and horse dewormer advocate Joe Rogan declared it his backup plan in case Twitter banned him.

But that love affair lasted less than a month before Rogan got hip to the fact that GETTR was funded with Chinese money and adding Twitter user counts to fudge follower numbers.

In a recent interview for The Tim Dillon Show, Rogan called the practices fuckery and stated that he didnt know how to get off the platform.

On the bright side for MAGA fans, GETTR still has Marjorie Taylor Greene. And, in all fairness, Trumps TRUTH network also used a Chinese firm to organize its funding.

Lol dont worry MAGA die-hards, Twitter will still be there when you inevitably decide to come back.

Read the original:
Trump's censorship czar for TRUTH social media once sued a cow over Twitter beef - The Next Web

Country

United States of AmericaUS Virgin IslandsUnited States Minor Outlying IslandsCanadaMexico, United Mexican StatesBahamas, Commonwealth of theCuba, Republic ofDominican RepublicHaiti, Republic ofJamaicaAfghanistanAlbania, People's Socialist Republic ofAlgeria, People's Democratic Republic ofAmerican SamoaAndorra, Principality ofAngola, Republic ofAnguillaAntarctica (the territory South of 60 deg S)Antigua and BarbudaArgentina, Argentine RepublicArmeniaArubaAustralia, Commonwealth ofAustria, Republic ofAzerbaijan, Republic ofBahrain, Kingdom ofBangladesh, People's Republic ofBarbadosBelarusBelgium, Kingdom ofBelizeBenin, People's Republic ofBermudaBhutan, Kingdom ofBolivia, Republic ofBosnia and HerzegovinaBotswana, Republic ofBouvet Island (Bouvetoya)Brazil, Federative Republic ofBritish Indian Ocean Territory (Chagos Archipelago)British Virgin IslandsBrunei DarussalamBulgaria, People's Republic ofBurkina FasoBurundi, Republic ofCambodia, Kingdom ofCameroon, United Republic ofCape Verde, Republic ofCayman IslandsCentral African RepublicChad, Republic ofChile, Republic ofChina, People's Republic ofChristmas IslandCocos (Keeling) IslandsColombia, Republic ofComoros, Union of theCongo, Democratic Republic ofCongo, People's Republic ofCook IslandsCosta Rica, Republic ofCote D'Ivoire, Ivory Coast, Republic of theCyprus, Republic ofCzech RepublicDenmark, Kingdom ofDjibouti, Republic ofDominica, Commonwealth ofEcuador, Republic ofEgypt, Arab Republic ofEl Salvador, Republic ofEquatorial Guinea, Republic ofEritreaEstoniaEthiopiaFaeroe IslandsFalkland Islands (Malvinas)Fiji, Republic of the Fiji IslandsFinland, Republic ofFrance, French RepublicFrench GuianaFrench PolynesiaFrench Southern TerritoriesGabon, Gabonese RepublicGambia, Republic of theGeorgiaGermanyGhana, Republic ofGibraltarGreece, Hellenic RepublicGreenlandGrenadaGuadaloupeGuamGuatemala, Republic ofGuinea, RevolutionaryPeople's Rep'c ofGuinea-Bissau, Republic ofGuyana, Republic ofHeard and McDonald IslandsHoly See (Vatican City State)Honduras, Republic ofHong Kong, Special Administrative Region of ChinaHrvatska (Croatia)Hungary, Hungarian People's RepublicIceland, Republic ofIndia, Republic ofIndonesia, Republic ofIran, Islamic Republic ofIraq, Republic ofIrelandIsrael, State ofItaly, Italian RepublicJapanJordan, Hashemite Kingdom ofKazakhstan, Republic ofKenya, Republic ofKiribati, Republic ofKorea, Democratic People's Republic ofKorea, Republic ofKuwait, State ofKyrgyz RepublicLao People's Democratic RepublicLatviaLebanon, Lebanese RepublicLesotho, Kingdom ofLiberia, Republic ofLibyan Arab JamahiriyaLiechtenstein, Principality ofLithuaniaLuxembourg, Grand Duchy ofMacao, Special Administrative Region of ChinaMacedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic ofMadagascar, Republic ofMalawi, Republic ofMalaysiaMaldives, Republic ofMali, Republic ofMalta, Republic ofMarshall IslandsMartiniqueMauritania, Islamic Republic ofMauritiusMayotteMicronesia, Federated States ofMoldova, Republic ofMonaco, Principality ofMongolia, Mongolian People's RepublicMontserratMorocco, Kingdom ofMozambique, People's Republic ofMyanmarNamibiaNauru, Republic ofNepal, Kingdom ofNetherlands AntillesNetherlands, Kingdom of theNew CaledoniaNew ZealandNicaragua, Republic ofNiger, Republic of theNigeria, Federal Republic ofNiue, Republic ofNorfolk IslandNorthern Mariana IslandsNorway, Kingdom ofOman, Sultanate ofPakistan, Islamic Republic ofPalauPalestinian Territory, OccupiedPanama, Republic ofPapua New GuineaParaguay, Republic ofPeru, Republic ofPhilippines, Republic of thePitcairn IslandPoland, Polish People's RepublicPortugal, Portuguese RepublicPuerto RicoQatar, State ofReunionRomania, Socialist Republic ofRussian FederationRwanda, Rwandese RepublicSamoa, Independent State ofSan Marino, Republic ofSao Tome and Principe, Democratic Republic ofSaudi Arabia, Kingdom ofSenegal, Republic ofSerbia and MontenegroSeychelles, Republic ofSierra Leone, Republic ofSingapore, Republic ofSlovakia (Slovak Republic)SloveniaSolomon IslandsSomalia, Somali RepublicSouth Africa, Republic ofSouth Georgia and the South Sandwich IslandsSpain, Spanish StateSri Lanka, Democratic Socialist Republic ofSt. HelenaSt. Kitts and NevisSt. LuciaSt. Pierre and MiquelonSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudan, Democratic Republic of theSuriname, Republic ofSvalbard & Jan Mayen IslandsSwaziland, Kingdom ofSweden, Kingdom ofSwitzerland, Swiss ConfederationSyrian Arab RepublicTaiwan, Province of ChinaTajikistanTanzania, United Republic ofThailand, Kingdom ofTimor-Leste, Democratic Republic ofTogo, Togolese RepublicTokelau (Tokelau Islands)Tonga, Kingdom ofTrinidad and Tobago, Republic ofTunisia, Republic ofTurkey, Republic ofTurkmenistanTurks and Caicos IslandsTuvaluUganda, Republic ofUkraineUnited Arab EmiratesUnited Kingdom of Great Britain & N. IrelandUruguay, Eastern Republic ofUzbekistanVanuatuVenezuela, Bolivarian Republic ofViet Nam, Socialist Republic ofWallis and Futuna IslandsWestern SaharaYemenZambia, Republic ofZimbabwe

Here is the original post:
Letter: Follow the difficult path to avoid censorship; Keep organ program; Expand Medicaid - Greenville Daily Reflector

click to enlarge

Photo via NSF

Senate Education Chairman Joe Gruters is sponsoring a bill that would increase scrutiny of school library books and instructional materials.

The proposal (SB 1300), sponsored by Senate Education Chairman Joe Gruters, R-Sarasota, was approved by the Republican-controlled Education Committee in a 6-3 vote along party lines. The bill would change the review process for books and other learning materials, adding requirements and making it more open to the public.

For instance, school boards would be required to publish on the website of each school the procedures for developing media-center collections.

Elementary schools would be required to publish on their websites in a searchable format all books and materials that are kept in the schools media centers or that are part of class reading lists.

I think thats where most of the complaints were receiving are from, Gruters said of the part of the bill specific to elementary schools.

The legislation aims to give the public increased input on how library and classroom books are chosen by spelling out that all instructional materials, with the exception of teacher editions, are subject to public inspection including the right to copy or photograph materials.

Committees that advise school boards on the ranking, eliminating or selecting of books and other materials would be required to include parents and community members

School boards also would have to adopt procedures that provide for the regular removal or discontinuance of library books based on criteria including alignment to state academic standards and out-of-date content.

The purpose of the bill is to create transparency in the process. Its not to censor anything. Its about giving people the opportunity to understand exactly what is being offered to their students, in terms of instructional materials, Gruters said.

But Sen. Lori Berman, D-Delray Beach, cautioned against opening the door to what she described as censorship.

This is the slippery slope of censorship. We are starting down the path of censorship. Its an authoritarian action, Berman said.

Several people who testified in favor of the bill advocated for the removal of books that they said contained sexually explicit content or material that was not age-appropriate.

But Sen. Tina Polsky, D-Boca Raton, said public schools should be places where children learn about the world around them.

If you want them insulated so much that they shouldnt learn about the outside world, then you should home-school them. Or you can send them to a religious private school with voucher money, Polsky said, directing her comment at people who spoke in favor of the measure.

School boards and parental involvement in education have become hot-button political issues for Republicans in Florida and other states. The issue, for example, played a key role in Republican Glenn Youngkins recent election as governor of Virginia.

The Senate bill resembles a House measure (HB 1467) that needs to clear one more committee before it could be considered by the full House.

The House bill, however, would nix salaries for school board members. The Senate bill would make school board members pay equal to the salaries of state lawmakers.

Lawmakers make $29,697 per year. School board salaries range this year from $26,965 in Liberty County to $47,189 in Broward, Hillsborough, Miami-Dade, Orange, and Palm Beach counties, according to a House staff analysis.

Theres 18 counties (that) have salaries below where we are today, Gruters said of lawmakers pay, adding that others pay school board members more than legislators.

The House has zero (pay for school board members) as their starting point. I believe that people should be compensated and that well continue on this discussion. And I think that certainly what we get paid is probably fair enough for what school board members should be paid, Gruters said.

Berman criticized the provision of the bill, saying its politically motivated against school board members. Polsky, who pointed out that board members in her home county of Palm Beach would take a pay cut under the plan, pressed Gruters on why the bill would get in the way of local decisions.

While I appreciate that its better than zero, I dont understand the reasoning for that either, Polsky said. So, again, why are we getting involved in a school districts decision on what to pay their school board?

I will say that the formula is in fact in statute. So we do have the authority to do it, Gruters responded.

Visit link:
'Slippery slope of censorship': Despite critics, Florida GOP moves forward with school books proposal - Creative Loafing Tampa