Below is my column in the Hill on the recent report of the House Judiciary Committee and the disclosure of yet another effort to silence opposing viewpoints by squeezing the revenue of individuals or groups, including Elon Musk and Joe Rogan.
Here is the column:
Few Americans have ever heard of the Global Alliance for Responsible Media, let alone understand how it shapes what they read and hear in news and commentary. That may soon change.
An alarming new report of the House Judiciary Committee details this organization’s work to censor conservative and opposing viewpoints in the media by targeting figures such as Joe Rogan and entire social media platforms such as X (formerly Twitter).
It is part of a massive censorship system that a federal court recently described as “Orwellian.” The sophistication of this system makes authoritarian regimes like China’s and Iran’s look like mere amateurs in censorship and blacklisting.
In my new book, “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in the Age of Rage,” I discuss our history of speech crackdowns and how this is arguably the most dangerous anti-free speech period that we have faced as a nation. The reason is an unprecedented alliance of government, corporate, academic and media institutions supporting censorship and the targeting of largely conservative viewpoints.
As discussed in the book, there is a crushing irony to the current anti-free speech movement. During the Red Scare and the McCarthy period, it was the left that was targeted with blacklisting, censorship and arrests. It is now the left that has constructed a global censorship system that exceeds anything that Joe McCarthy even dreamt of in the control of news and commentary.
Through the years, I have testified repeatedly in Congress on this system supported enthusiastically by President Biden and his administration. It has proven to be a frustrating game of whack-a-mole for civil libertarians. The Democrats in Congress have uniformly opposed any investigation or action on censorship while denying for years that there was a coordinated effort between government and corporations. When we were successful in uncovering components of this system, they were often quickly shut down as the work shifted to other components and assets.
One of the most insidious efforts has been to strangle the financial life out of conservative or libertarian sites by targeting their donors and advertisers. This is where the left has excelled beyond anything that has come before in speech crackdowns.
Years ago, I wrote about the Biden administration supporting efforts like the Global Disinformation Index to discourage advertisers from supporting certain sites. All of the 10 riskiest sites targeted by the index were popular with conservatives, libertarians and independents. That included Reason.org and a group of libertarian and conservative law professors who simply write about cases and legal controversies. The Global Disinformation Index warned advertisers against “financially supporting disinformation online.” At the same time, HuffPost, a far-left media outlet, was included among the 10 sites at lowest risk of spreading disinformation.
Once that index’s work and bias was disclosed, government officials quickly disavowed the funding. It was a familiar pattern. Within a few years, we found that the work had been shifted instead to groups like the Global Alliance for Responsible Media, which is the same thing on steroids. It is the creation of a powerful and largely unknown group called the World Federation of Advertisers, which has huge sway over the advertising industry and was quickly used by liberal activists to silence opposing views and sites by cutting off their revenue streams.
These censorship groups typically proclaim that they are merely trying to promote “brand safety” when they target for suppression the same sites that challenge the political and media establishment. The group states that it “unites marketers, media agencies, media platforms, industry associations, and advertising technology solutions providers to safeguard the potential of digital media by reducing the availability and monetization of harmful content online.”
That “harmful content” seems to be the very same sites long targeted by the Biden administration and its allies in business, the media and academia.
The internal communications of these censorship groups demonstrate their contributors’ underlying agenda. In one conversation between Global Alliance for Responsible Media co-founder Rob Rakowitz and individuals with an associated “GroupM,” two executives explained to Rakowitz how they identified sites that they did not like and simply monitored them until they could find something that crossed the line. An example is the Daily Wire, a site hated by liberals for its conservative viewpoints and critiques of mainstream media.
In describing how they work to bag such sites, John Montgomery, executive vice president of Global Brand Safety, explained: “There is an interesting parallel here with Breitbart. Before Breitbart crossed the line and started spouting blatant misinformation, we had long discussions about whether we should include them on our exclusion lists. As much as we hated their ideology and bulls–t, we couldn’t really justify blocking them for misguided opinion. We watched them very carefully and it didn’t take long for them to cross the line.”
In other words, they preselected the sites and then followed their every move like a patrol unit following a car to wait for them to go one mile per hour over the limit.
This is called “deplatforming,” a favorite term from higher education, whereby liberal groups organize to shout down and block speakers with opposing views. The Global Alliance for Responsible Media is too sophisticated to simply bullhorn groups into silence. Instead, it strangles them financially.
Those who do not yield, from Elon Musk’s X to mega-podcaster Joe Rogan, were quickly added to the list to be deplatformed. Musk is particularly dangerous because he was responsible for blowing the lid off the censorship system by releasing the “Twitter Files,” detailing coordination between government and social media companies to silence citizens and groups.
To this day, companies like Facebook continue to fight efforts to disclose their own censorship files.
Musk has threatened to sue in light of the report. “Having seen the evidence unearthed today by Congress, X has no choice but to file suit against the perpetrators and collaborators in the advertising boycott racket,” he said.
A lawsuit would be difficult to maintain. These groups have a right to organize to silence opposing views just as book burners have a right to burn books. However, deplatforming, book burning and blacklisting have long been anathema to free speech values. They are efforts to prevent opposing views from being heard rather than to respond to such views on the merits.
And Musk is right in describing this as a “racket.” There is now a disinformation cottage industry where a wide array of academic and private groups are raking in a fortune targeting individuals and other groups for blacklisting, banning and censorship.
There are other groups working in tandem in this effort. For example, Newsguard was created by to Chief Executive Officers Steven Brill and Gordon Crovitz to monitor and effectively blacklist media that they deemed misinformative or false. The site uses mainstream journalists to rate news sites, even though many of these sites have challenged the bias of the mainstream media.
Once again, the apparatus serves to shield that bias in targeting disfavored sites. The Biden administration has extended contracts with Newsguard to incorporate the system, and it is even being used in schools, despite complaints that it shows the very same pro-Democrat and left-wing bias.
There is a reason why projects such as the Global Disinformation Index have been largely concealed from public view. There is a reason Facebook and other companies have fought mightily to conceal their own censorship files. The anti-free speech movement is not a popular movement.
A majority of the public continues to oppose censorship. This is a movement that came from higher education and has been pushed by the political and media establishment, not the public.
That is why many of us in the free speech community are hoping that the 2024 election will become a referendum on censorship. Biden has given a full-throated endorsement of these efforts, even to the point of claiming that companies that do not censor American citizens are “killing people.” He presides over the most anti-free speech administration since John Adams.
So now, let him defend it with voters.
In 1800, that did not work out well for Adams, who was defeated by Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson had run on restoring freedom of speech. The public can now flip the script. It is time to defund and deplatform America’s censors.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He is the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage” (Simon & Schuster, June 18, 2024).
Is the Internet private property?
The Internet is the light everyone uses, under rules that apply to all. You have no inherent right to block the light, placing others in darkness.
Which means that anyone can start up a website or get a Facebook, Instagram, X or other on-line account. When you comment on someone else’s web site, you are a guest and not a free citizen.
The internet may not be private property, but individual web sites are. On your own web site or account you can condemn anyone you want into a dark oblivion.
When the government intervenes or a business uses bad practices, it is time for that business to disappear. I understand your point, but that point is based on your lack of morals and ethics.
If free enterprise and private property rights are a lack of morals or ethics then I’m Jack the effing Ripper.
Free enterprise is a non-living concept, so as a form of commerce, it can’t have morals or ethics. You, who lacks morals and ethics, create the problems the rest have to live with.
An anonymous Soviet Democrat Coward made this defense of Facebook et al being police state fascist contractors carrying out government censorship:
Which means that anyone can start up a website or get a Facebook, Instagram, X or other on-line account. When you comment on someone else’s web site, you are a guest and not a free citizen.
But you won’t be getting millions of dollars from the federal government, while they put FBI operatives inside the Zuckerbucks Facebook management team to designate which newspapers and which individuals trying to publish on your web site get selectively censored or completely locked out.
Why would Zuckerbucks Facebook, Instagram, etc be screaming in terror at losing Section 230 protection if they truly function as a private website publisher, rather than having a business relationship with government where they are paid and advised on who does and doesn’t get censored on their platform?
The Second Coming will fix it. Marxist scum are right to fear.
Grimace has become a gay icon:
https://nypost.com/2023/06/16/grimace-turns-into-lgbtq-icon-as-mcdonalds-mascot-makes-a-comeback/
These are private groups that give their opinion about the state of lies on the internet from what should be honest sources. This is not government censorship. The bottom line is that Truley and the Republicans don’t like it when they are called out for BS and they thus label it “censorship” and want those sites shut down.
If Turley believes that it is a free speech right to lie on the internet, surely it is free speech for others to identify such lies and those who spread them.
That is true, you are free to speak as you would, but you are not free from the consequences. Libel and slander law suits should take care of some of that, but strong-arming companies into “shaping” the news is really little different than bribing congressmen to pass certain legislation. Elections are what matter and finding the truth is the business of the voter rather than just accepting the propaganda.
“This is not government censorship.”
The hell it’s not.
It’s the worst type of government censorship: fascism — when a tyrannical government uses private companies to suppress speech, ideas, art.
Just as did Nazi Germany and fascist Italy.
Whether government censors use a carrot (here’s a bunch of money) or a stick (nice business you got there) — it’s *government* censorship.
That is ridiculous.
If Jim Jordan retweets a Turley post, is JonathanTurley.com government censorship when your post is removed from the site? That is basically what you are claiming.
Sammy The Soviet Democrat Clown tried his own special version of defending the Soviet Democrat Official Propagandists, Facebook:
These are private groups that give their opinion about the state of lies on the internet from what should be honest sources.
It’s a massive Soviet Democrat lie that Facebook, clan be a private group, while being paid MILLIONS of taxpayer dollars to have Soviet Democrat politicians and the FBI tell them to censor newspapers and prohibit them from publishing the story of the Bribery Biden Laptop, while government employees on the DoJ payroll are embedded in management to advise on who to censor and who to allow to publish.
And so we see Facebook operating as Bribery Biden’s censorship proxy, repeated Bribery Biden’s election campaign lies:
“This Biden Bribery Laptop is only Russian election campaign disinformation about my son that doesn’t actually exist”
And…
“My future Secretary of State Anthony Blinken has found 51 former intelligence agency officials who say they want to help Biden survive the debate against Trump, who are willing to say my Biden Bribery Laptop is only Russian election campaign disinformation that doesn’t actually exist”.
I’m going to take a wild assed guess those aren’t the state of lies the Soviet Democrats have put on the internet from Biden/Obama sources that aren’t honest sources that Sammy wanted to talk about.
When government funds it
It is government action
Government may not do through proxies what it can not do directly
I like Elon Musk, I have a problem with Facebook and the games that when you win Elon gives you a prize like a new Tesla and Money. But the people claim to be the real Elon Musk. and end up on messenger for the information and they want you to send them a 500 dollar Apple Gift card number you buy at a store. Facebook is allowing this fraud to grow and continue.
The story of GARM and kin reads a lot like the history of guilds. Both choke points on the free flow of ideas, goods and services. Truth has a way of finding its way to the top, but not always in step with the election cycle- or our impatience to have it get here. That creates a market demand among speakers and listeners for a better product. Watch for it. There’s a Henry Ford out there who will come with a media business model that upholds the First Amendment.
Good luck with that having cinder blocks the likes of Sheila Jackson Lee on that committee.
I thought she was diagnosed with terminal cancer. Wouldn’t wish that on anyone, not even her.
fascist globalist and democrats AREN’T giving up power…they are FIGHTING A CIVIL WAR
So we best start fighting back! Look at Clinton and Obama who were paid $100 Million after being president…Bush and Trump….paid negative millions!
They are
And they are losing
I hope you are not defending bush
He was at best less bad than Obama/biden
If you recall this started under Obama, it started slowly but it’s now in full gear and flushing our nation down the spit hole.
“We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”.
I guess Barry didn’t consider the will of free men and women in his transformative dream!
The sophistication of this system makes authoritarian regimes like China’s and Iran’s look like mere amateurs in censorship and blacklisting.
Biden’s disastrous debate showed the world that the Deep State / Biden’s Handlers / Obama’s people are not only censoring and blacklisting opposing views. They are also censoring Joseph Biden. If Biden were not suffering moderate neurocognitive impairment, he would realize he is just a puppet. Even the NYT admitted as such on July 11.
China and Iran are presumably led by evil dictators. America is led by a sinister stealth group that was never elected. You were right to say China and Iran look like amateurs compared to the evil individuals controlling America’s public square and America’s marionette President
A review of President Biden’s interviews shows he is often asked the same few questions in interviews. It’s not a coincidence.
July 11, 2024
A close look at more than two dozen radio and podcast interviews given by Mr. Biden over the past two years reveals a distinct pattern: In appearance after appearance, the president has been served up nearly identical questions, prescreened or suggested ahead of time by campaign staff members. And in nearly every case, the questions set the president up to deliver on-message talking points, without notable flubs.
The review sheds light on a tactic the Biden campaign has used liberally to control the president’s interactions in public, one that appears to have accelerated as the election has approached. Mr. Biden has given fewer interviews with news outlets than any modern president, and many of those have been with friendly interviewers, rather than journalists, who take questions and talking points from the campaign.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/11/us/politics/biden-campaign-media-2024.html
The deep state puppet idea is reinforced by Biden himself. When he reads stage directions he’s telling the public he’s just a reader of script. When he walks like a puppet he’s telling you he is a puppet. When he shakes hands with invisible people he’s saying it’s so deep and hidden the public is unaware.
Kamala gives further evidence of whom or what it is. The laughter is the JOKER a sinister evil character. The Venn diagrams are suspiciously like radiation warnings. The teaching children of both Jill and Kamala implies they are teaching the children sinister bs.
The icing on the cake was Biden in his red castle speech saying I don’t care if you think I’m Satan himself.
Blink SOS
I disagree with your largesse in combating these sites with lawsuits and/or legislation.
“A lawsuit would be difficult to maintain. These groups have a right to organize to silence opposing views just as book burners have a right to burn books.” They can do that if they are single and/or localized group but once they institute this organization nationwide and worldwide they act as a cartel and monopoly. The “marketplace of ideas and speech” is as real as any other market out there. If anything, it is even more important because activities in the usual marketplace start in the marketplace of ideas. If that is suppressed or destroyed then the entire marketplace is affected adversely. I think you have to move beyond just the first amendment and attack these organizations from 2 sides. 1-is the suppression of free speech which is constitutionally protected, and is as important to free expression and thought without the interference of government or private entities. 2- is to attack this from a monopoly point of view. We would attack and breakup any broadcaster that tried to buy up or control of all media in specific areas. Just as the fact that our government supposedly blocks an entity from owning too much market power in a localized area like New York where you cannot own all the tv stations, papers, radio stations. Like Rupert Murdoch with Fox had to limit his acquisitions of the NY Post and Wall Street journal but not The NY Times. And his access to radio stations and Tv stations are also limited in light of his other media acquisitions.
You just have to move up one step to a cartel like organization that controls all the advertising revenue. Money is a far more effective inducement to suppression than breaking down doors and wrecking printing presses. You just take away the money. The government and the courts are supposed to act as the referees in the marketplace and have a light footprint for the most part. But it should not be blind or unresponsive to cartels.
This shows the hypocrisy of the European Union also. They have attacked the American high tech titans with anti monopoly actions and legislation but they have no fear or shame acting as the cartel of information management. That is not their role. I think they have continued to pay only lip service to their hallowed “rights of man”.
I think Musk is right to support Trump, because Trump might be more likely to talk to the European Union in a “come to jesus meeting” about the fining and suppression of X and other purveyors of news and commentary. A few selected tariffs in appropriate places might enforce a change. Germany used to be the driver of the EU business world but they are struggling and very vulnerable right now and that means the EU is also vulnerable to some “frank discussions”.
An organized boycott of the corporatist/fascistic entities aiding FedGov in suppressing speech might be a useful first step. Yes, a lot of people are hypocrites who would never take the trouble to “put their money where their mouths are”, but I suspect there are enough who would, if they had the information on who was doing what to whose dog. I am not aware of a dedicated source for lists of who to boycott to punish activities that are designed to impair our Liberties. There are sites that mention this kind of behavior, but it takes a lot of effort to collate that information. A site that serves no other purpose and simplifies this for all who might be interested might be of considerable benefit.
Turley wrote: “That is why many of us in the free speech community are hoping that the 2024 election will become a referendum on censorship. Biden has given a full-throated endorsement of these efforts, even to the point of claiming that companies that do not censor American citizens are ‘killing people.’ He presides over the most anti-free speech administration since John Adams.”
Hmmm. High-minded rhetoric there. Let’s see if Turley informs us on how he casts his vote for President in November (assuming he does vote). He previously admitted voting for Biden. If Biden remains the nominee, or is replaced on the ticket by Harris, or another regime Democrat who is complicit in the coordinated effort to squelch free speech, and Turley admits voting for the Democrat, or if he fails to publicize his vote, his credibility will be irrevocably damaged (imo).
Turley’s vote is Turley’s vote to exercise as he sees fit. It is private and should not be subject to anyone’s intimidation or influence. As much as we would hate to see anyone vote for a demented Biden, anyone believing in our Constitutional Republic would not pursue this agenda?
It is absolutely his right to vote as he chooses, but it is no longer private once he chooses to publicize it on his web site. No one asked him to do that. It is reasonable to presume that one reason that he has done so is to enhance the perception of his credibility. In other words, to establish the premise that he is sincere and unbiased in his criticism of the current state of Liberal Democrats and the Democratic Party because that is what he is. Once he does that, it is absolutely fair and reasonable to further evaluate that credibility based on whether his vote conflicts with the beliefs he espouses in his column. YMMV
Not voting is also a legitimate choice
Writing in an acceptable choice is legitimate
A few weeks ago I emailed my senator, Bob Casey (D-PA) regarding censorship and his constitutional obligation to stand for free speech. His reply was what I would have expected from a “low information voter.” He said he stands for free speech, and then came the “BUT.” So, he supports free speech under certain conditions. This year Casey stands for re-election. His opponent is not well-known. Casey will win and carry his willingness to censor back into the senate for another 6 years.
I think we have all witnessed these deplatforming tactics and attacks even here in Turleyville. Allow me to confer with my sidekick Waters for a moment,,,
Professor Turley,
You write: A lawsuit would be difficult to maintain. These groups have a right to organize to silence opposing views just as book burners have a right to burn books. However, deplatforming, book burning and blacklisting have long been anathema to free speech values.”
Why does your motto of “fight bad speech with better speech” not apply to corporate speech? Corporations have free speech rights and any supporter of free speech rights should be able to understand that the Congressional inquiry is nothing more than anMcCarthy-like witch hunt targeting the free speech rights of corporations. Especially after the NetChoice cases, this is nothing but a waste of tax dollars.
The idea that conservatives are marginalized by “mainstream media” has always been a fiction. Fox News (and News Corp( ARE mainstream media. Twitter and Truth Social are run by conservatives.
Government intervention to require liberal news sites to allow advertising that doesn’t align with their viewers interests is clearly ant-free speech. Can you imagine requiring Fox News to allow Planned Parenthood to advertise in Primetime? Would that be your understanding of free speech for Planned Parenthood?
Anonymous 8.11AM
You are disingenuous by taking the argument “imaging requiring Fox News tp allow Planned Parenthood to advertise in Primetime”. This is not about requiring Fox or anyone else being to advertise a certain entity. You’re creating a Strawman argument. It’s to allow an organization to make its decisions on who it sells advertising to but removes the cartel that eliminates certain options before they even get the entity wanting to sell or buy advertising. The NewsGuard acts to eliminate conservative news by “screening”, another way of saying “eliminating” , those businesses that want to sell advertising as not meeting NewsGuard “values and truth”. Business need to make their own decisions and not work thru a cartel.
It’s a subtle but very important concept which, therefore, is not a surprise that you totally missed it.
Do you not think that FoxNews / NewsCorp can manage its own advertising?
There is nothing that a corporate group can do to prevent Fox from wanting to let the MyPillow guy advertise on its airwaves.
Another book plug? Sigh. It must not be doing well. Anyhoo, this whole censorship schtick about only conservatives being targeted is flawed. Conservatives are not being censored at all. They are always publishing and expressing their views and ideas all the time, even on facebook, X, news, books, and even on TV.
Social media platforms CAN choose to moderate content as they see fit. This blog does this every day. The Supreme Court recently ruled that the government CAN suggest, or encourage social media platforms to scrutinize content that may violate their platform’s rules. Government does have free speech rights just as everyone else does. Some believe that’s not true without ever being able to articulate why. Simply saying “they can’t” is not enough.
Republicans/conservatives engage in censorship far more bluntly than the supposed efforts by the left. Book bans, banning discussion of a topic because it makes others uncomfortable, denying others the ability to decide what to discuss in schools, etc.
The GDI was not about targeting conservative advertisers and encouraging others not to do business with them. Turley is being dishonest with that particular issue. The GDI only posts information that anyone can use to decide whether to advertise or not. They do not encourage or tell others not to spend money on certain groups. It’s handy for plugging his book, but terrible for making an argument.
George is a lying partisan hack, probably a paid partisan hack.
George remember this, the people supporting censorship or book burning or controlling information are never the good guys.
PS. Keeping books on how to perform oral sex out of kindergarten libraries is NOT book burning.
Hullbobby, nobody is keeping books in kindergarten about sex acts. You’ve been driving the moms for liberty kool-aid far too much.
Conservatives have indeed sought to ban books that have not been in school libraries or even used. Using fear mongering tactics and intimidation to deny a minority group’s identity because you don’t like it IS censorship. If you don’t like a certain book don’t check it out. If you don’t want your child to check out a certain book TELL the librarian. It’s really quite simple. But of course you don’t want that. YOU want to dictate to others what they should and should not look at or read. That’s censorship.
Name a book that conservatives have tried to ban that ISN’T in a school library. Now see what the left does with Amazon, the NY Times and even Target with book sales. YOU LYING FOOL!
Hullbobby, moms for liberty has been prolific in lying to the public about the nature of the books. Cherry picking passages completely out of context and harping about things that are not remotely true because they don’t like the idea that others want to read books the moms for liberty crowd don’t like. It’s censorship at its purest.
HullBobby,
They truly are some sick and twisted people.
Answer the question, liar
Name the book
Because you say so ?
If you want to read pornography to your kids
You are free to do so
But teachers are not free to sexualize all kids because some parents like you want that
Is it all that hard for you to understand that a subset of us do not get to impose their ideology or sexuality on other peoples children by force
Then provide the passages in context
Proving m4p wrong is trivial
But only if what you are countering is true
So put up
Provide the evidence
Oh, dictate to others what they can see or hear? You mean like law students at Stanford preventing a judge invitee from giving a speech and other mobs on college campuses shouting down invited speakers? Like the the argument that “silence is violence” (silence is speech)? You mean like that, George?
Shouting down speakers is actually exercising free speech. Turley disagrees, but always neglects to point out that it’s not illegal or unconstitutional to shout down a speaker. They also have plenty of options besides speaking at a school. It’s always up to the speaker to decide whether to quite speaking or continue despite the heckling and shout downs. Those doing the shouting down CAN be removed. Free speech doesn’t mean a right to be heard.
Nothing in the constitution or criminal law states exercising speech must be civil or orderly in order to be protected speech. Not a single thing.
Shouting down an opponent is NOT free speech. It is disingenuous to say that, you are taking away another’s free speech by doing so. Watching these incidents, I believe a good left hook and a kick in the nuts would be warranted. Nothing is ever free, someone has to fight for it.
It is absolutely free speech. Shouting down a speaker by a private individual/s is perfectly legal. It’s uncivil and rude, but legal. It’s not a crime.
However those who choose to do so are also subject to being removed. It’s up to the speaker to choose to continue and stand his/her ground or stop.
It is not legal it is a crime
It is disorderly conduct
And you could go to jail
It is also absurd that you would believe this
It is idiotic to presume that any right includes the right to deprive that right in others
In a public forum you have the Sam right to speak in that forum as anyone else
But NOT at the same time
No shouting down speakers is not free speech
Long ago the Supreme Court correct found that not only does free speech include the right to speak
But also to hear
You may not shout down an invited speaker
That is not free speech
That is anti free speech
You are free to hold your own event where you choose the speakers
You are free to ask your questions if the speaker has a q&a
You are not free to silence others
Your rights end when they actually infringe on the actual rights of others
Confederate George, going for a record number of lies today:
Conservatives have indeed sought to ban books that have not been in school libraries or even used.
And yet, there’s all the parents protesting child pornography in their childrens’ school libraries that George lies doesn’t exist:
“At the March 17 meeting, Michelle Brown was told to stop reading a sexually explicit passage from a book that’s available to school children in the county’s libraries. A school board member interjected her concerns that the live-streamed reading was “inappropriate” for any children who might be listening.”
https://www2.cbn.com/news/us/irony-ga-school-board-shut-down-mom-reading-dirty-book-aloud-they-said-kids-might-hear-it
If conservatives are seeking to bar schools from teaching books that according to you are not used
Why are you ranting about it
Out of one corner of you mouth you seem to agree that we should not allow schools to sexualize children – atleast you claim it is not happening
Out of the other corner of your mouth you rant about right wing censorship
Logic eludes you
You have things backward
Schools must have the permission of parents
This must be opt in
Not opt out
A school can not presume it can provide pornography to children unless parents object
George
You live in an alternate reality
Parents are not reading books from Amazon at school board meetings
They are reading the books their children have been assigned and brought home
There is no such thing as done right to “identity”
You are free to call yourself whatever you want
I am free to call you whatever I want
Fauxchahantus called herself Cherokee
Most of the rest of us don’t
You are free to call yourself a woman
Others can say your not
That is how life works
Calling yourself whatever you want is free speech
Others calling you something different is free speech
Shouting down speakers is called disorderly conduct
You seem to have a great deal of difficulty with things that were resolved hundreds of years ago
George is Ralph De Minimus / Svelaz / Wally / Gigi, et al, a paid troll to sabotage Turley’s forum. Replying to George and whatever sockpuppet he uses, only furthers his employer’s goal: detract from Turley’s articles.
George is like a black hole. All light, sound, thought disappears down into the hole and nothing comes out except toxic radiation
Sounds like Chicago, Philadelphia, Seattle, Atlanta, Oakland, and the biggest Glory hole ever San Francisco!
GEB,
Well said and spot on.
Just scroll past.
Although it is fun to watch John Say dismantle him.
Sounds like one of those Masadonian content farmers that plagued Hillary.
Read the book, George. Even you might learn something. But it is hard to get a rock to think.
Better than yours.
George is on a roll of stupid today, pitching for Facebook with the usual “don’t believe your lying eyes, believe me because my eyes don’t lie like yours do”.
Another book plug? Sigh. It must not be doing well.
George’s pathetic attempt at humor today… Seems to be getting a lot more support than the ravings of a Confederate racist who claims his racism is constitutional.
Social media platforms CAN choose to moderate content as they see fit.
The lie of omission traveling in the company of insinuation. But Facebook et al are being PAID by elected Soviet Democrats who instruct them on who to censor and who to kick right off their platform. The only choice Facebook made was to agree to take millions of taxpayer dollars and choose to allow FBI employees to be part of the moderating team carrying out federal government censorship by proxy.
The next layer when peeling George’s decaying onion of Soviet Democrat lies:
Republicans/conservatives engage in censorship far more bluntly than the supposed efforts by the left. Book bans
There’s that blatant Soviet Democrat moral equivalency lie. Where can we find that Republican banned book list that prohibits George from buying his monthly copies of Hustler magazine with it’s crotch shots? Or copies of Gender Queer to give his children to teach them how to give each other blowjobs?
How much money did Republicans pay to Facebook to censor Bribery Biden, The New York Times, The Washington Post, etc when Trump was in power?
banning discussion of a topic because it makes others uncomfortable
That’s another blatant Soviet Democrat moral equivalency lie. Which Republican/conservative states have their governments banned George from stepping into the public square to lecture his audience of why he’s a Tranny who wants to dress like a cheap street slut whore to read to kiddies who still believe in Santa Clause?
Which of those states have banned George from explaining to his audience why he is still continuing his yearly membership in the North American Man Boy Love organization, or discussing their controversial claim that their pedophilia should be legalized and part of LGBQT? legal Alphabet Sex.
George can’t make an adult argument to defend his claims. And he’s a terrible liar when he turns to lies to make his argument instead.
George is a very sick kitten.
It is irrelevant what you think GDI or GARM are
They receive government funding
Therefore the may not participate as r encourage censorship
Social media can do as it pleases
Advertisers can do as the please
Consumers can do as they please
Turley can do as he pleases
But government may not censor
Government may not even suggest censorship
Government may not pay others to censor
Those who take government money may not censor
You can not get arround the constitution by using cutouts
Luckily no one cares about advertising any more. I think X even lets you pay a fee to avoid seeing ads from anyone. We get information right from the makers/providers of products/services we’re interested in. No middlemen needed.
I’ve DVR’d every TV show I’ve watched for 20 years now (could have done the same with a tape deck but that was too much work) so I never see an ad. I only answer phone calls from numbers I’ve put on my contact list so I never get an advertising robocall.
Dennis, I never agree with you but I do agree that DVR’ing shows is the only way to go. For me it started with sports when I realized I could watch a 3 hour football game in 2 hours and a 3 hour basketball game in 2 hours also. The greed of the players AND owners became so strong that the networks had to include more and more commercials just to make the endeavor viable. Football is bad but basketball is brutal as each team has SEVEN time outs which turns out to be 14 more commercial breaks.
I then moved on to regular TV and now I watch Jeopardy in 22 minutes, Bret Baeir, Watters, Ingraham and Gutfeld in 40 minutes and I never sit through a FIVE MINUTE commercial break.
Even without recording capability streaming sources (e.g. Hulu, Roku, etc.) can be fairly easily managed to avoid in-line advertising. In some cases, a very small increase in monthly fee is required to subscribe to ad free content, in some other cases (e.g. Paramount+ movie content) the ads are all front-loaded, and so easily avoided. Use of browser extensions (e.g., NoScript & uBlockOrigin) in conjunction with a VPN is (99% effective for me in ad avoidance on the web. There are a very few sites that I value that are ad-supported (e.g. WattsUpWithThat), and it is not convenient to create exceptions in the ad blocking scheme for those, so I make sure I send such sites a small, periodic, donation.
You cracked the code on that one. Mute button works too!
In light of the events July 13th, 2024, the associated “reporting” and commentary by the MSM, it is crystal clear the censorship conglomerate is in overdrive. FB removed images and comments not in line with their “viewpoint” on what happened and the past call to violence by prominent Democrats. If not for X the distortion of the facts about what had occurred would have been the CNN report of “Secret Service Helps Trump Up After He Falls”!!!! The complete suppression of eyewitness accounts that the shooter was reported to Law Enforcement minutes before he fired (Source: BBC) is the proof that fact suppression is part of the censorship Plan.
Biden has promised a complete detailed report on what happened. It will be released November 6, 2024
Then we will know for sure who tried to assassinate President Putin, did I say Putin, I meant Zelintrump.
The COVID lockdown and the sudden power given to local and national authorities is a case in point to the danger of taking away the individual rights of citizens (“for their own safety”) to think for themselves.
DeFund the Think Tanks
Devaluing the Think Tank
By: Tevi Troy ~ Winter 2012
https://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/devaluing-the-think-tank
Rethinking the Think Tank
By Anne-Marie Slaughter and Ben Scott ~ Nov. 12, 2015
https://www.newamerica.org/weekly/rethinking-the-think-tank/
better yet…just TAKE AWAY THE MONEY
cut federal spending 50%
End all federal aid to cities, states, non-profits and colleges
Defund Democrats!
Anonymous7:43am
These are not think tanks. They are only deniers of truth and propagandists. To be a think tank requires Thought. These tanks act on reflex and call it thought.
LOL. Touché. and on that note….
Morning Joe’ pulled from air Monday because of Trump shooting
A person familiar with the matter told CNN that the decision was made to avoid a scenario in which one of the show’s
stable of two dozen-plus guestshosts, Mika Brzezinski and Joe Scarborough might make an inappropriate comment on live television that could be used to assail the program and network as a whole. Given the breaking news nature of the story, the person said, it made more sense to continue airing rolling breaking news coverage in the fraught political moment.https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/14/media/msnbc-morning-joe-pulled-trump-assassination/index.html
Estovir,
Wow!
Yeah, things are not going so well for ol Joe Jcarborough after his little speech about “start taping now, I am going to tell you the truth about Biden.” or whatever he said.
Mika Brzezinski is the daughter of Zbigniew Brzezinski (dec.)
Zbigniew Brzezinski’s mandate is to break the USSR into separate States which was accomplished by Boris Yeltsin,
then convert those States into NATO Countries and surround Moscow (Swallow what’s left of Russia).
PDF:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.usip.org/sites/default/files/SR23.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjkz4fMo6mHAxWkTTABHRp1DisQFnoECBkQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0TulBRZffKqtYtzlYw-LSg
What countries are aspirations for NATO?
Since 1949, NATO’s membership has increased from 12 to 32 countries through 10 rounds of enlargement. Sweden became the latest country to join the Alliance on 7 March 2024. Currently, three partner countries have declared their aspirations to NATO membership: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia and Ukraine.
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_49212.htm
That’s the Plan Man – That’s why We are there, and heading for WW•III
Yeah, I had a good gut guffaw when I read that headline. Let’s see if he and his idiot wife fully get their slot back after the dust settles. I’m hoping “not”…