WHY MAINSTREAM MEDIA WEBSITES ARE CENSORING & REMOVING COMMENT SECTIONS

Google’s new tool, Perspective, works by comparing comments left on news websites to comments left on Wikipedia and the New York Times that were deemed “toxic” by a team of human reviewers.

The only criteria given for what constitutes a “toxic” comment is that it causes someone to leave a conversation. Obviously, this could also include someone who lost a debate or who is merely offended or triggered by another comment.

With trust in mainstream media plummeting, the real goal behind the censorship and in some cases entire removal of comment sections is to manipulate public opinion.

As the Daily Tech revealed, Popular Science admitted that the decision to pull its comment section was in order to preach a “scientific doctrine” on global warming without being challenged.

Popular Science acknowledged that their decision was based on a study by Dominique Brossard, a Life Sciences Communication professor at the Univ. of Wisconsin-Madison, that appeared in the February 2013 edition of the peer-reviewed Journal of Computer-Mediated Communications.

read more:

http://www.infowars.com/why-mainstream-media-websites-are-censoring...

 

And this is what you have going on right now with mainstream media outlets. They are supposed to be allowing US citizens discuss and fact check their articles but now your seeing their own personal bias become the news. Big shout out to Infowars!

Views: 717

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Image result for thought police

One of the several reason I don't do Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, you-name-it

Image result for thought police

Image result for thought police

The hatred from the political Left is overflowing like that Oroville Dam in California. It was cresting before November 8, 2016 and overflowed after the election. Liberal Democrats have never accepted the election result.aaA great many mistake Trump's direct bombastic style as confrontational and like he is picking a fight all the time. They regard his less than articulate style as incompetence. So he is not a smooth talker like so many of them politicians.
Look what all these smooth talking politicians have accomplished in DC:
A national debt that is now almost $20 trillion, an influx of illegals in the tens of millions, a southern border with Mexico that is more porous than the filter in a coffee brewer, a US military that is so weakened we are lucky the Russians, Chinese, North Koreans and Iranians held back and did not mount or stage a more serious provocative confrontational military challenge against the USA here at the home front or
elsewhere in the world. These smooth talkers say things gullible people want to hear. Once they get the votes and are elected into high office, their allegiance switches quicker than the rampaging waters off that leaking dam in California.
I have said it before. I will say it again. These liberal Democrats including the MSM are wrong about Donald J Trump. They are on the wrong side of history.
Enough said.

It's as if the NWO is taking the lead from George Orwell's novels, 'Animal Farm'  and '1984'... written in the late 40's, these novels present us with some very startling parallels, prophetic insights into todays ruling class...  If one wants a good read, with insights into todays leftist dogma and propaganda driven world... these two novels would serve them well.

Was George Orwell a GENIUS or just lucky ? ( PROPHETIC ) An ancient con used to make money by predicting the future of the GULLIBLE ! 

Inspired prophecy is not profit centered... Mr. Orwell was a genius and quasi prophet by any standard of examination... he was gifted with a perceptive view of the future...

Orwell's work continues to influence popular and political culture... The term Orwellian.. is descriptive for totalitarian social practices...  this term and more have entered our language with many neologisms, including: Cold war, Big Brother, Thought Police, Room 101, Memory hole, Newspeak, doublethink, and thougthcrime...  Given his proclivity to describe future events, with such detail, one might call him a modern day prophet.

WELL  SAID   COL.

Atlas Shrugged also hits the nail on the head.

Actually Ayn Rand's, 'Atlas Shrugged' is a little convoluted... so many people disappearing.  Where is John Galt... may be beyond some to understand... too, connect the dots.  However, George Orwell's dystopian classics are clear, entertaining and easily understood...

John Galt .... is holding up a bridge in CHICAGO

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

ALERT ALERT

Horrible: Democrats Set The Constitution On Fire With Fraudulent Impeachment

House Democrats unveiled two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump on Tuesday morning after an investigation that violated fundamental provisions of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

The investigation of the president began with the complaint of a so-called “whistleblower” who turned out to be a rogue Central Intelligence Agency employee, protected by a lawyer who had called for a “coup” against Trump in early 2017.

Democrats first demanded that the “whistleblower” be allowed to testify. But after House Intelligence Committee chair Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) was found to have lied about his committee’s contact with the “whistleblower,” and after details of the “whistleblower’s” bias began to leak, Democrats reversed course. In violation of the President Trump’s Sixth Amendment right to confront his accuser, Democrats refused to allow the “whistleblower” to testify. They argue the president’s procedural rights, even if they existed, would not apply until he was tried in the Senate — but they also invented a fraudulent “right to anonymity” that, they hope, might conceal the whistleblower even then.

Schiff began the “impeachment inquiry” in secret, behind the closed doors of the Sensitive Compartmentalized Information Facility (SCIF) in the basement of the U.S. Capitol, even though none of the testimony was deemed classified. Few members of Congress were allowed access. Schiff allowed selective bits of testimony to leak to friendly media, while withholding transcripts of testimony.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), having allowed the secret process to unfold, legitimized it with a party-line vote authorizing the inquiry. The House resolution denied President Trump the procedural rights enjoyed by Presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, and denied the minority party the traditional right to object to witnesses called by the majority.

Rather than the House Judiciary Committee, which traditionally handles impeachment, Pelosi also deputized the House Intelligence Committee to conduct fact-finding; the Judiciary Committee was turned into a rubber stamp. Schiff held a few public hearings, but often failed to release transcripts containing exculpatory evidence until after they had passed.

In the course of the Intelligence Committee’s investigation, Schiff quietly spied on the telephone records of his Republican counterpart, Ranking Member Devin Nunes (R-CA). He also snooped on the phone records of a journalist, John Solomon; and on the phone records of former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, acting as President Trump’s personal lawyer.

Schiff’s eavesdropping violated both the First Amendment right to press freedom and the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Yet he proceeded undeterred by constitutional rights, publishing the phone logs in his committee’s report without warning, confirmation, or explanation, alleging that Nunes and the others were part of a conspiracy to assist the president’s allegedly impeachable conduct. When Republicans on the Judiciary Committee asked the Intelligence Committee’s majority counsel, Daniel Goldman, to explain the phone logs, he refused to answer,

Ironically, Schiff had done exactly what Democrats accuse Trump of doing: abused his power to dig up dirt on political opponents, then obstructed a congressional investigation into his party’s and his committee’s misconduct.

Democrats’ articles of impeachment include one for the dubious charge of “abuse of power,” which is not mentioned in the Constitution; and one for “obstruction of Congress,” which in this case is an abuse of power in itself.

Alexander Hamilton, writing about impeachment in Federalist 65, warned that “there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.” Democrats have fulfilled Hamilton’s worst fears.

The Trump impeachment will soon replace the 1868 impeachment of President Andrew Johnson — which the House Judiciary Committee staff actually cited as a positive precedent — as the worst in American history.

In service of their “coup,” Democrats have trampled the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The Republic has never been in greater danger.

You don't get to interrupt me

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service