PDA

View Full Version : Digital lock down: “the establishment is scared sh*tless”



Althena
16th November 2016, 14:17
http://libertynews.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Screen-Shot-2016-11-15-at-7.39.17-PM-620x420.png

DIGITAL LOCK DOWN: GOOGLE AND FACEBOOK TAKE AIM AT ‘FAKE NEWS’ WEBSITES: “THE ESTABLISHMENT IS SCARED SH*TLESS”

The moves by Google and Facebook follow a recent de-monitzation 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.

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.

This is only the beginning. The lockdown will continue.

Full report:http://libertynews.com/2016/11/digital-lock-down-google-and-facebook-take-aim-at-fake-news-websites-the-establishment-is-scared-shtless/

Carmody
16th November 2016, 15:16
The term 'lockdown' inherently suggests that there will be a time where the 'lock' is lifted.

This is not the case.

It is about stages of change, done by the inch, by the act.

It is a step in a march, done in a direction and motion --- that will be unceasing.

'Lockdown' was very much the wrong word to employ.

Althena
16th November 2016, 15:47
This is only the beginning. The censorship will continue.

Better?

enigma3
16th November 2016, 15:48
Remember when the Google motto was do no harm? Yeah, right. Google has been co-opted and bought out by the elites and spy agencies. It is just another MSM outlet to me now. Even the results of a search are weighted towards the sponsors. They lost their ethical high ground a long time ago. I use it as a secondary search engine sparingly.

I agree with Carmody here. Digital crimping is more like it. The MSM clearly does not like the alternative media and is trying to villify and marginalize it. That will fail.

TargeT
16th November 2016, 15:51
The term 'lockdown' inherently suggests that there will be a time where the 'lock' is lifted.

This is not the case.

It is about stages of change, done by the inch, by the act.

It is a step in a march, done in a direction and motion --- that will be unceasing.

'Lockdown' was very much the wrong word to employ.

For clarity, what you can also infer from this statement is that "they" are NOT scared sh*tless, this is just a clean up move, one more click on the one way ratcheting mechanism. HOWEVER, the internet Is NOT facebook and google... so in reality this is only "so" effective.

I wouldn't worry too much, that which people want, is what they will get... just make sure you know what you want and don't settle for less ;)

Bob
16th November 2016, 15:58
As I read it, it deals with Google's Ad's being removed from sites they feel are abusing AdSense.


Google said it is working on a policy change to prevent websites that misrepresent content from using its AdSense advertising network, while Facebook updated its advertising policies to spell out that its ban on deceptive and misleading content applies to fake news.


Facebook's steps are limited to its ad policies, and do not target fake news sites shared by users on their news feeds.

"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.

by reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-alphabet-advertising-idUSKBN1392MM)

AdSense -

AdSense, which allows advertisers to place text ads on the millions of websites that are part of Google's network, is a major source of money for many publishers.

A report in BuzzFeed News last month showed how tiny publishers in Macedonia were creating websites with fake news [..]

GrnEggsNHam
16th November 2016, 16:07
As I read it, it deals with Google's Ad's being removed from sites they feel are abusing AdSense.


Google said it is working on a policy change to prevent websites that misrepresent content from using its AdSense advertising network, while Facebook updated its advertising policies to spell out that its ban on deceptive and misleading content applies to fake news.


Facebook's steps are limited to its ad policies, and do not target fake news sites shared by users on their news feeds.

"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.

by reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-alphabet-advertising-idUSKBN1392MM)

AdSense -

AdSense, which allows advertisers to place text ads on the millions of websites that are part of Google's network, is a major source of money for many publishers.

A report in BuzzFeed News last month showed how tiny publishers in Macedonia were creating websites with fake news [..]

This is also how I heard it reported. However, my thought process immediately went to where Athena is in the OP. Just as TargeT and Carmody asserted, I believe this is merely the first step in a long march.

Bob
16th November 2016, 16:37
Looking at the OP, the 'source' webpage of the 'article' (LibertyNews.com), and then looking at what Google and FaceBook published as reference to removing PAID AD's from fake, or hoaxing, or misrepresenting 'news sites', getting those sites to no longer PROFIT from PAID AD'S is the focus which both companies emphasized.. The feeling is the original libertynews.com page misrepresented the Google and Facebook announcement, and "spun it", as they say "trolling" for an emotional response, which it appears that they succeeded, IMHO.

Going to a page which has a list of (http://www.fortliberty.org/hoax-sites.html) fake, misrepresenting or hoaxing websites, this LIST comes up, and the OP's reference: libertynews.com is in the list. "EACH of those sites is known to publish a LEGITIMATE article, which then makes it SEEM that the site when a legit article is being published that it is 100% above board". (a paraphrased quote from fortiliberty.org)

the list:

21StCenturyWire.com
800WhistleBlower.com
ActivistPost.com
Alternet.org
AmericanNews.com
AntiWar.com
BeforeItsNews.com
BigPZone.com
Chronicle.su
ConsciousLifeNews.com
ConspiracyWire.com
CountdownToZeroTime.com
CounterPsyOps.com
DailyBuzzLive.com
DailyCurrant.com
DCClothesLine.com
Disclose.tv
DuffelBlog.com
DuhProgressive.com
EliteReaders.com
EmpireNews.net
English.ruvr.ru
EUTimes.net
FederalistPress.com
FreePatriot.org
FromTheTrenchesWorldReport.com
GeoEngineeringWatch.org
GlobalResearch.ca
GonzoGlobe.com
GovtSlaves.info
GuardianLV.com
GulagBound.com
HangTheBankers.com
HealthImpactNews.com
HumansAreFree.com
Huzlers.com
InfoWars.com
IntelliHub.com
LewRockwell.com
LibertyNews.com
LiveFreeLiveNatural.com
NationalReport.net
NaturalCuresNotMedicine.com
NaturalNews.com
Newswire-24.com
NoDisinfo.com
NotAllowedTo.com
Now8News.com
NowTheEndBegins.com
PakAlertPress.com
PoliticalBlindSpot.com
PressTV.ir
PrisonPlanet.com
RandPaulReview.com
RawForBeauty.com
RealFarmacy.com
RedFlagNews.com
ResponsibleTechnology.org
RT.com
SecretsOfTheFed.com
SouthWeb.org
TheCommonSenseShow.com
TheControversialFiles.net
TheDailySheeple.com
TheFreeThoughtProject
TheLastGreatStand.com
TheNewAmerican.com
TheRacketReport.com
TheRightPlanet.com
TheRunDownLive.com
TheUSPatriot.com
TopInfoPost.com
TruthAndAction.org
TruthBroadcastNetwork.com
TurnerRadioNetwork.com
UndergroundHealth.com
USAHitman.com
VeteransToday.com
WesternJournalism.com
WhyDontYouTryThis.com
WorldNewsDailyReport.com
WorldTruth.tv
YourNewsWire.com


Fil Menczer, who is a professor of "informatics and computing (http://www.soic.indiana.edu/)" at Indiana University who has studied the spread of misinformation on social media, has said this: "What if it is a site with some real information and some fake news? It requires specialized knowledge and having humans (do it) doesn't scale" - detecting fake news sites and fake/hoaxed/misrepresented 'news' is not easy..

No doubt some of 'our' pet news sites are on that list. Point being discernment is needed, and checking the 'source', going back to the original quote(ers) and verify for oneself.. and not getting 'emotional' or trolled from any article..

DeDukshyn
16th November 2016, 16:55
Looking at the OP, the 'source' webpage of the 'article' (LibertyNews.com), and then looking at what Google and FaceBook published as reference to removing PAID AD's from fake, or hoaxing, or misrepresenting 'news sites', getting those sites to no longer PROFIT from PAID AD'S is the focus which both companies emphasized.. The feeling is the original libertynews.com page misrepresented the Google and Facebook announcement, and "spun it", as they say "trolling" for an emotional response, which it appears that they succeeded, IMHO.

Going to a page which has a list of (http://www.fortliberty.org/hoax-sites.html) fake, misrepresenting or hoaxing websites, this LIST comes up, and the OP's reference: libertynews.com is in the list. "EACH of those sites is known to publish a LEGITIMATE article, which then makes it SEEM that the site when a legit article is being published that it is 100% above board". (a paraphrased quote from fortiliberty.org)

<...list trimmed...>

Fil Menczer, who is a professor of "informatics and computing (http://www.soic.indiana.edu/)" at Indiana University who has studied the spread of misinformation on social media, has said this: "What if it is a site with some real information and some fake news? It requires specialized knowledge and having humans (do it) doesn't scale" - detecting fake news sites and fake/hoaxed/misrepresented 'news' is not easy..

No doubt some of 'our' pet news sites are on that list. Point being discernment is needed, and checking the 'source', going back to the original quote(ers) and verify for oneself.. and not getting 'emotional' or trolled from any article..

"Trusting" Alternative news sites is not a strategy to find the truth. Even the best intentioned sites will end up with some bull**** on them - it's not avoidable, whether by honest mistake, lack of research, or "paid" for by someone else. We must treat them the same as MSM sites, which means to never relax your critical thinking based on a "source". MSM also contains 'real" info and news as well; maintaining healthy skepticism and critical thinking for all inputs is goal. Never relaxing them for any "source" is also goal, as that is the very attitude that got us trapped into believing BS in the first place..

Althena
16th November 2016, 17:36
I'm surprised to see Activist Post on that list. Shouldn't CNN, MSNBC and the rest of the liars be on that list also?

petra
16th November 2016, 18:34
This is great news to me. Go ahead, scare them S-less, I say!

Profiting from disinformation is a BAD thing, right?

Bob
16th November 2016, 18:48
take a look at http://www.fortliberty.org/hoax-sites.html - they have an interesting dialog and the bloggers/feedback after the article is interesting too, specifically folks asking what you did. The only point being what @DeDukshyn and I said, find the source material behind any "sensationalistic" or potentially trolling "article" and see what the real data is, research in other words..


from DeDukshyn's post above (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?94558-Digital-lock-down---the-establishment-is-scared-sh-tless--&p=1114370&viewfull=1#post1114370):
"Trusting" Alternative news sites is not a strategy to find the truth. Even the best intentioned sites will end up with some bull**** on them - it's not avoidable, whether by honest mistake, lack of research, or "paid" for by someone else.

We must treat them the same as MSM sites, which means to never relax your critical thinking based on a "source".

MSM also contains 'real" info and news as well; maintaining healthy skepticism and critical thinking for all inputs is goal.

Never relaxing them for any "source" is also goal, as that is the very attitude that got us trapped into believing BS in the first place..

Chanlo23
16th November 2016, 19:28
Hi,

The list posted from the Fort Liberty site is described as containing hoax/fake news sites, some of which do post legitimate news with some mix of fake; however it is does not list heavily biased sites which are skewed left, right, wingnut, chaos/anarchy, or whistleblowing, etc. The Google list is https://docs.google.com/document/d/10eA5-mCZLSS4MQY5QGb5ewC3VAL6pLkT53V_81ZyitM/preview and appears to be regularly updated. You will see that on it, they list hoax, fake, misleading, and satirical sites (a lot of these sites like to use similar-sounding names, such as Fort Liberty vs Liberty News).

Part of what is misleading about this Liberty NEWS article mentioned in OP post 1 is that the proliferation of junk is being labeled 'alt' information, which makes anyone who is legitimately trying to inform will be discounted. Liberty News site IS on the Fort Liberty List and on the Google list.

With that in mind, looking at the headline grabbing ad, maybe more than the establishment 'should' be scared. How is anyone to discern which of 50000 sites has 'real' information when the criteria seems to be get-them-to-the-site ($ for advertisers, $ for the linkers that push readers to them, $ for the site, @#$ the readers). A key factor is folks are paid to link/push readers to them - baiting/trolling to be paid in $ or the satisfaction of pushing folks to a site that panders to their particular bias or satisfaction of pulling a fast one on people genuinely look for information and getting hoodwinked, etc.

I feel the whole object is to drown people in data, fake/real/biased so they can not begin to sort real from fake, especially when the only criteria for news is what is most profitable (most clicks), whatever produces the most emotional charge (outrage, adoration, whatever), also produces the most cash. There are no ethics, no morals, no 'holds' except the criteria of what makes them cash.

In an age when many people no longer read print media, and base all their thoughts/opinions on what they find on the internet, the increasing number of sites like this should be a concern to all of us. Maybe its funny to hear some kid spout utter nonsense (because you know if its on the web it has to be true), but in the long run, we have to cleanup after those folks.

Charlott

Flash
16th November 2016, 19:56
A time will come when lots of people wont find what they are looking for on google, or will realised they bought a product push on top because it is a google sponsor and they paid way too much for it, or they will stop trusting google as they are starting to do with mainstream media after the US election, and they will use other search engine, allowing for competition to google

So, please enigma, can you tell us which engine you are using and which are the most effective. I would need them, google not yielding what I know exist on the web for a research I do. Thanks. I know about yahoo and tor and startpage

So, please

Remember when the Google motto was do no harm? Yeah, right. Google has been co-opted and bought out by the elites and spy agencies. It is just another MSM outlet to me now. Even the results of a search are weighted towards the sponsors. They lost their ethical high ground a long time ago. I use it as a secondary search engine sparingly.

I agree with Carmody here. Digital crimping is more like it. The MSM clearly does not like the alternative media and is trying to villify and marginalize it. That will fail.

Desire
16th November 2016, 21:04
The time may come when we must gather together sites like Project Avalon and create our own Google type enterprise and have it run by people we trust like Bill Ryan.

TargeT
16th November 2016, 21:21
The time may come when we must gather together sites like Project Avalon and create our own Google type enterprise and have it run by people we trust like Bill Ryan.

No, a cult of personality will not help the situation; thats how we got here in the first place.

There are already replacements for the services mentioned in this thread, those replacements don't advertise as well as these multi-billion dollar companies though ;).

Communication shouldn't be run by someone we trust, it should be run so transparently that we trust it because it's all "above board".

I think communication should be considered a human right (this includes "solitary confinement" situations in prison as a violation of human rights) that way the stuff like the NSA snooping on us would be a violation of human rights, any form of cenorship would be a violation of human rights.. much easier to nail "spying" down that way.

But then, I also don't believe in "hate speech" & think the 1st amendment should be completely unfettered.

Desire
16th November 2016, 21:57
Communication should be a right ,I agree, but we need to take precaution to insure that it will be IMO.

Positive Vibe Merchant
16th November 2016, 22:48
I think that people's view of 'the internet' has become narrowed because of youtube and facebook etc. There are a lot of different ways that you can access information on the web outside of these instruments. Just have to keep looking. Alot is changing at the moment. there is desperate grabs for power.

Sunny-side-up
17th November 2016, 19:22
I think this fits in here:

RED ALERT: Corporate Media’s War on ‘Fake News’ Is Being Used to Silence Dissent and Alt Media
Read more at http://thefreethoughtproject.com/mainstream-war-dissent-fake-news/#PhPG6uisgreJoQKg.99

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/mainstream-war-dissent-fake-news/

norman
26th November 2016, 18:37
What I Learned From the "PropOrNot" Propaganda List



3D9W3EHKrTE

Published on Nov 26, 2016
SHOW NOTES: https://www.corbettreport.com/?p=20546

Yes, corbettreport.com has made this new, mysterious, anonymously-authored "propaganda list" of websites to watch out for in the era of #FakeNews (https://www.youtube.com/results?q=%23FakeNews) and Russians under every rock. And yes, the list is as ridiculous as that sounds. Join me today as I look into the latest pathetic attempt by a flailing establishment to bolster their discredited mouthpiece media organs and counter the ascendant alternative media. (Spoiler: they're going to lose this battle as well.)

Mike Gorman
26th November 2016, 21:41
The fact that Infowars.com is on this list immediately outs it as a cleansing of opposition campaign-this is a complete outrage and an obvious censorship move, the establishment news mouthpieces are being eclipsed and out competed-Infowars alone has many millions more views than CNN & the other mainstream platforms (at least in terms of raw online consumption and radio)-if we don't prevent this we deserve all we get-the internet has been a thorn in the side of mainstream politics for at least the ;last 10 years when social media has really taken off -because 'social media' is the current state of the internet (Thanks Gary Vaynerchuk) as far as many billions of people are concerned!

Paul
1st December 2016, 15:23
Yes, corbettreport.com has made this new, mysterious, anonymously-authored "propaganda list" of websites to watch out for in the era of #FakeNews (https://www.youtube.com/results?q=%23FakeNews) and Russians under every rock. And yes, the list is as ridiculous as that sounds. Join me today as I look into the latest pathetic attempt by a flailing establishment to bolster their discredited mouthpiece media organs and counter the ascendant alternative media. (Spoiler: they're going to lose this battle as well.)
Perhaps the PropOrNot.com "fake news" list (http://www.propornot.com/p/the-list.html) is not as ridiculous as it sounds.

The sites on that list do seem, at some level, in my view, to mostly buy into the dominant themes of what divides us, but those sites just happen to "take the other side".

The sites such as the following that I read to find "whole 'nother ways" of looking at the affairs of humanity, that endeavor to see beyond the usual divisions, were not listed on PropOrNot.com. My list of favorite "deeply alternative sites" includes: Project Avalon (http://projectavalon.net)
Alt-Market.com (Brandon Smith) (http://www.alt-market.com/)
Club Orlov (Dmitry Orlov) (http://cluborlov.com/)
Miles Mathis (http://mileswmathis.com/updates.html)
Jon Rappoport's Blog (https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/)
RedefiningGod.com (Ken) (http://redefininggod.com/)
Philosophy of Metrics (JC Collins) (http://philosophyofmetrics.com/free-pom/)
Robert Distinti (https://www.youtube.com/user/rdistinti)

Perhaps the PropOrNot fake news list is just another way to get us to pick sides, from amongst the sides offered us on the menu, their menu.