Politico like much other government “owned” news outlets claim that following the VAGUE and non-equally applied Twitter rules is how one avoids getting removed from access to Social Media platforms. Their recent article by JACK SHAFER is proof of that.
Here is a reminder how “neutral” and “unbiased” Politico really is:
If conservatives (or others) feel censored by Twitter, I invite them to do what writers have done since the first editors inhibited their voices: Drive Twitter insane by playing by their rules, expressing yourself right up to the Politico of the company’s standards in a way that will invite inspection and self-criticism of those standards.Jack Shafer @Politico
Jack Shafer needs to remember that the news is not regurgitating orders. The news is reporting FACTUAL INFORMATION that is not pre-scripted for them. In an article posted yesterday here it shed light into how the Obama Administration LEGALIZED domestic Dissemination of Propaganda.
It’s becoming a running theme for all those in “contractual” relations with the “government” within the government that seem to approve of curbing free speech. After all, they aren’t really journalists they are simply tools to “report” what they are told. If it wasn’t for independent reporters like Laura Loomer, Liz Crokin and many others everyone would be none the wiser. The fact that Politico had the cheek to run such an article considering their blatant actions as a mouth piece for the left, depicts just how much they value the intelligence of their readers.
RELATED: This Is Orwellian Warfare
Additionally, Politico doesn’t pay attention to detail because in court Twitter has repeatedly testified that they are NOT a publisher in order to avoid lawsuits brought up against them for discriminating against user access. Evidently, their actions depict that of a publisher and maybe in an Appellate Court be determined as such by way of actions, not statements. It’s all about intent right?
This tweet from Shafer reminded me of an image I stumbled upon about a year ago that was applicable to Hillary Clinton in regards to her entitlement and throwing boulders in her glass house.
Lastly, Shafer’s comment about GAB must be dissected and appropriately addressed.
How big is the potential audience for transgressive right-wing content? Gab.ai, which has proclaimed itself friendly to ultra-right expression, has attracted about 800,000 users compared with Twitter’s 330 million.Jack Shafer
Potential audience? It’s unlimited Jack (both Shafer and Dorsey). 330 Million users have been accumulated over 10 years by Twitter and they did not have the hurdles alternative social media platforms like GAB has. Open Market? Not Really. They have been excluded from the APP market but PORN apps are allowed. #StopTheBias Even without being afforded ease of accessibility features the GAB platform within 2 years of inception has a growth larger than that of Twitter in their early days. Besides, GAB doesn’t get funded by DARPA to conduct experiments with users, nor does it create it’s own bots like Twitter and NOR does it work for the Alphabet Soup Agencies like Twitter does.
People are leaving Twitter rapidly and soon it will be an echo chamber for the left to promote their hate, divisiveness, and propaganda. Advertising? In the near future, for fiscal reasons subscriptions will be introduced after the class action suit against Twitter drops. #StayTuned
TRENDING: LOOMER BANNED FROM TWITTER
Mr. Shafer with Politico’s history of being a mouthpiece as demonstrated by the Wikileaks email drops and this article you wrote tongue-in-cheek substantiates the statement that you are indeed the ENEMY of the FREE PEOPLE. You don’t report the news you are simply an amplifier for propaganda. This is an onerous statement but necessary. Independent investigative journalists who write on this outlet, and people like Laura Loomer, Liz Crokin, Matt Couch, Tracey Beanz