As we went over just last week, the attempt to pressure social media companies into limiting the scope of discourse on their platforms has been consistently bellowed for over a decade. Currently in the form of White House whistleblower Frances Haugen, the movement to practically prevent American free speech is just heating up.
A recent history of dissatisfaction over media performance
In 2016, even before the media was re-imagined as a carnivalesque barker of doughy sensibilities and racial discord, Americans had little trust (20 percent confidence rate) in the handful of companies impersonating the constitutionally enshrined 4th estate. In the years following the study, conservative politicians were blamed for sowing mistrust of media – “harming democracy” – yet the justifiable distrust of the mouthpieces of such frequent and impactful inaccuracies hardly needs new endorsement.
Not surprising considering Newton’s first law of motion, the media quality and consolidation respectively continue their southbound journeys. According to the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism at Oxford, America ranks dead-last in media trust — at 29% — among 92,000 news consumers surveyed in 46 countries.
Rather than a critique of the general purpose of journalism – the narrative the self-proclaimed victim-media perpetrates rather than introspection – the uneasy suspicion voiced by so many Americans is merely a condemnation of the 6 media conglomerates that run 90 percent of our media.
Contrary to the often biased and politically motivated information presented by the elite 6, the previous gatekeepers of American information, independent journalists create a means of inquiry for the masses in the online world.
That unfiltered access to information, more than hate speech or dangerous health opinions, is what is being attacked here. Those in favor of “public oversight of social media” (government oversight of social media) are confessing their wish to have others decide a thought’s value and impact rather than personally having the opportunity for analysis. Sadly, with a politically motivated fantasy of silencing dissenting voices, politicians and the public are allowing the form of mental slavery for the sake of all things petty and short-sided.
Who is Fraunces Haugen?
Unlike nearly any whistleblower in history, the voguish new face of government control is an instant media darling. With her fancy blue check-mark on Twitter (not to mention becoming a popular recommended follow) and history of left-wing activism, pretending this message comes purely out of worry for the body image of young girls ignores too many questions.
Contrary to that notion, Haugen’s lawyers have filed eight complaints about Facebook with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including the company’s ineffectiveness at removing hate speech and lamenting that Facebook didn’t deploy “lasting counter-measures” or sufficiently fight so-called misinformation, right-wing extremism, and violence regarding the 2020 election and Jan. 6 riot.
Haugen, who exists in a world where Russians tricked America via Facebook to vote for Donald Trump, is someone you would expect to support reducing conservative speech on public forums.
The whistleblower is a longtime contributor to the DNC and its associated causes. She is currently working with a PR firm owned by Obama press aide Bill Burton. Haugen also works with the Center for Humane Technology, which aims to promote a “comprehensive shift toward humane technology that supports the collective well-being, democracy and shared information environment.”
Maybe more egregious than anything if we’re taking the whistleblower concept seriously, Burton served as a campaign adviser for Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn – who sits on the Senate committee that invited Haugen to testify.
Worrying about other people’s homes before tidying her own, Haugen had a $44, 000 federal lien placed against her for unpaid taxes. The spearhead of speech regulation cleverly set up a GoFundMe to remedy her tax evasive behavior, begging her way to over $38,000 toward a $100K goal to help with her expenses.
Conclusion
More than the beginning of a much-needed national conversation, as the various outlets drool and bubble out, this is nothing more than the continuation of a long-term strategy to scapegoat social media companies for the nation’s woes in an attempt to suppress speech in America. The presence of the most endorsed, best-connected whistleblower in history is just this week’s show. Get ready for what’s next.