Connect with us

International

Most Americans concerned about social media censorship this election cycle

Published

4 minute read

From The Center Square

By 

Just before the 2020 election, the FBI successfully pressured social media companies like Facebook and Twitter to censor or shadow ban articles about Hunter Biden’s laptop as Russian disinformation, although the laptop was later verified as valid and not Russian disinformation.

The majority of Americans are concerned that social media companies are censoring information ahead of the 2024 election, according to a new poll.

The Center Square Voter’s Voice poll, one of only six national tracking polls in the U.S., asked 2,290 likely voters: “Are you worried that social media companies are censoring content about the 2024 election right now?” The poll’s margin of error is +/- 2.1% for likely voters

The survey found that 61% of likely voters replied “yes” while only 25% said “no” and the rest are not sure.

Men were a bit more concerned, 64% compared to 57% of women.

The poll also found 66% of Hispanic respondents and 62% of white voters shared the concern.

A plurality of Black respondents shared the concern, 44%, compared to 40% who did not.

Republicans were more concerned, 78%, than Democrats, 43%, although a plurality of Democrats shared the concern.

Notably, 61% of Independents shared the worry that social media companies are censoring content.

The poll comes after Mark Zuckerberg, founder of Facebook, admitted to the U.S. House Judiciary Committee in August that he regretted caving to government pressure to censor Americans during the previous election and the COVID-19 pandemic.

“I believe the government pressure was wrong, and I regret that we were not more outspoken about it,” Zuckerberg said in a letter to the committee at the time.

The House Oversight Committee opened an inquiry into Google in August after reports that Google autocompleted searches of presidential assassination attempts for other past presidents but omitted Trump.

Google brushed aside concerns as technical issues, not intentional censorship.

The House Judiciary Committee also raised concerns about Facebook censoring the now-famous photo of a bloodied Trump pumping his fist after the assassination attempt, among other issues. A Meta representative acknowledged that was a mistake.

“Specifically, Meta’s AI assistant claimed, ‘the attempted assassination of former President Donald Trump was a ‘fictional’ event,’ even as the chatbot ‘had plenty to say about Democratic rival Kamala Harris’ run for the White House,” House Oversight Chair Rep. James Coker, R-Ky., wrote, citing a New York Post article.

“When asked if the assassination on President Trump was fictional, Meta’s bot responded that there ‘was no real assassination attempt on Donald Trump,” the letter continued. “I strive to provide accurate and reliable information, but sometimes mistakes can occur.’ The bot further added, ‘[t]o confirm, there has been no credible report or evidence of a successful or attempted assassination of Donald Trump.’”

Just before the 2020 election, the FBI successfully pressured social media companies like Facebook and Twitter to censor or shadow ban articles about Hunter Biden’s laptop as Russian disinformation, although the laptop was later verified as valid and not Russian disinformation.

Reporting has also shown that social media companies, at the behest of the federal government, censored Americans’ posts about COVID-19 vaccines and related issues.

The presidential race is very close, which means any censorship in the last few weeks could make an impact.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

conflict

Putin calls out Biden for ‘escalating’ war in Ukraine right before Trump takes office

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Conservative Treehouse

Russian President Vladimir Putin was asked about the motives of outgoing U.S. President Joe Biden to escalate the NATO conflict with Russia. He responds by outlining genuine motives that political pundits in the U.S. pretend not to know.

During an appearance in Kazakhstan last week, Russian President Vladimir Putin had a press conference with Russian journalists who asked questions about the current conflict with Ukraine.

Before getting to the video, it is worth mentioning that our Western viewpoint of Russia respecting strength is not entirely accurate. There is something Russians respect more than strength: brutal honesty.

One of the things that separates Russians from their Eastern European counterparts is their keen ability to detect and dismiss b******t. If you watch Russian engagement, from either inside or outside of Russia, their non-pretending is truly an art form. Even the silent space between their words is something remarkable to watch.

In this first video segment, Russian President Putin is asked about the motives of outgoing U.S. President Joe Biden to escalate the NATO conflict with Russia. President Putin responds by outlining genuine, factual, and honest motives that political pundits in the U.S. pretend not to know. It’s fascinating to watch:

Why the presser? Why the questions? Why the willingness? Look, I’m no Putin whisperer, but I can see a brutally obvious motive of Vladimir Putin speaking directly to President Trump, through the media. For a myriad of reasons, including the honesty of his responses and statements, this approach seems completely logical and practical.

This next segment is even more interesting.

In this segment, Vladimir Putin is describing his views on President Trump and the status of his perspective toward Donald Trump against the backdrop of what Putin witnessed. Of course, the opportunity for passive aggressive snark is available, and Putin would not be Russian if he did not take the opportunity troll the U.S. government at the same time. Watch:

Reprinted with permission from Conservative Treehouse.

Continue Reading

illegal immigration

Court rules in favor of Texas in razor wire case

Published on

From The Center Square

By

Attorney General Ken Paxton also said the ruling was a “huge win for Texas…. We sued immediately when the federal government was observed destroying fences to let illegal aliens enter, and we’ve fought every step of the way for Texas sovereignty and security.”

A panel of three judges on the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Texas in a lawsuit filed over its concertina wire barriers.

The court ruled 2-1 in a case that may set the tone for two other cases before the court related to Texas’ border security operations.

Circuit Judge Stuart Kyle Duncan wrote for the majority, with Judge Don Willett joining him. Judge Irma Carrillo Ramirez dissented, arguing Texas did not meet “its burden to show a waiver of sovereign immunity or a likelihood of success on the merits.”

The ruling was issued 13 months after Texas sued the Biden administration after it destroyed concertina wire barriers it erected on state land.

The court was asked to decide whether Border Patrol agents can legally cut concertina wire fencing erected by Texas law enforcement along its border with Mexico. The Biden administration ordered Gov. Greg Abbott to remove it, arguing he was interfering with federal immigration operations. Abbott refused, arguing that the administration was facilitating illegal entry and violating federal law. In response, the administration ordered Border Patrol agents to use a bulldozer and remove wire fencing. Abbott sued, arguing they were destroying Texas property and Texas has the legal authority to erect barriers on state land.

Texas requested the district court to issue an injunction to block Border Patrol agents from removing the fencing, which it denied despite agreeing with Texas’ arguments.

The court “agreed with Texas on the facts: not only was Border Patrol unhampered by the wire, but its agents had breached the wire numerous times ‘for no apparent purpose other than to allow migrants easier entrance further inland,’” the Fifth Circuit’s 75-page ruling states. However, it denied Texas’ request arguing the federal government had sovereign immunity.

Texas next appealed to the Fifth Circuit, which granted the injunction pending appeal. The Biden administration appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which vacated the injunction without any stated reason.

The Supreme Court’s ruling didn’t deter Texas, which continued building and erecting concertina wire in the Eagle Pass area, and later established the military base for Texas’ border security mission, Operation Lone Star, there. OLS officers also expanded concertina wire barriers in other key areas along its border.

“The Texas National Guard continues to hold the line in Eagle Pass,” Abbott said at the time. “Texas will not back down from our efforts to secure the border in Biden’s absence.”

The three-judge panel ruled that Texas “is entitled to a preliminary injunction.” The ruling states that the Biden administration “clearly waived sovereign immunity as to Texas’s state law claims under § 702 of the Administrative Procedure Act,” which it says “is supported by a flood of uncontradicted circuit precedent to which the United States has no answer.”

The Fifth Circuit also rejected other Biden administration arguments, including that Texas was erecting barriers to safeguard its own property, not to “regulate Border Patrol.”

The ruling reversed the district court’s judgment and granted Texas’ preliminary injunction. The court also prohibited the federal government from “damaging, destroying, or otherwise interfering with Texas’s c-wire fence in the vicinity of Eagle Pass,” including Shelby Park, which Abbott shut down after learning that the Biden administration was using it as a staging ground to facilitate illegal entry into the US.

Abbott lauded the Fifth Circuit ruling, saying, “The federal court of appeals just ruled that Texas has the right to build the razor wire border wall that we have constructed to deny illegal entry into our state and that Biden was wrong to cut our razor wire. We continue adding more razor wire border barrier.”

Attorney General Ken Paxton also said the ruling was a “huge win for Texas.”

“The Biden Administration has been enjoined from damaging, destroying, or otherwise interfering with Texas’s border fencing. We sued immediately when the federal government was observed destroying fences to let illegal aliens enter, and we’ve fought every step of the way for Texas sovereignty and security.”

With weeks left in the administration, the concertina wire barrier case is unlikely to be appealed for a full court review.

In May, the court is scheduled to hear arguments on a lawsuit related to Texas’ marine barriers in the Rio Grande River, unless the case is dropped by the incoming Trump administration. Another case before the court is over Texas’ border security law, SB 4.

Continue Reading

Trending

X