“We’ve designated the shooting in Kenosha a mass murder and are removing posts in support of the shooter,” Facebook introduced barely per week after the occasion, because it started a really epic marketing campaign of censorship blatantly at odds with its professed help free of charge speech.
Just for starters: Killing two individuals is mass homicide now? Sure seems like the social-media large’s workers simply reached for the nearest excuse to suppress posts that conflicted with their private prejudices — and no higher-up bothered to right the name.
The blackout went far and vast: Facebook actively policed its customers for pro-Kyle Rittenhouse posts and eliminated the content material. It even focused posts from authorized students arguing the deserves of his self-defense case.
And it made it exhausting to see even the stuff it didn’t get killed outright. “One of the big things that they did was manipulate the search engine so you couldn’t even find any references to Kyle Rittenhouse,” Dan Gainor, vice chairman of the Media Research Center, instructed The Post. “They’re out of touch with normal people.”
More broadly, the firm defined its blackout thusly: “We don’t allow symbols, praise or support of dangerous individuals or organizations on Facebook. We define dangerous as things like: terrorist activity, organized hate or violence, mass or serial murder, human trafficking, criminal or harmful activity.”
In different phrases, it discovered Rittenhouse responsible of crossing some of these traces months earlier than he bought his day in court (the place he received vindication) — and did its finest to make sure he’d be discovered responsible in the court of public opinion by throwing out almost all defense arguments and proof.
We additionally strongly doubt Facebook applies its supposed ban on help for “dangerous individuals or organizations,” “organized hate” or “criminal or harmful activity” with any consistency. Too many of these phrases are far too fuzzy: Legitimate protest, for instance, could be technically prison, and accusations of “organized hate” are all too frequent.
A really impartial normal right here is the one which GoFundMe utilized: It pulled down each defense fund for Rittenhouse, saying its phrases of service “prohibit raising money for the legal defense of an alleged violent crime.” As lengthy because it does so for all such funds, that’s not biased.
But Facebook’s workers simply couldn’t resist selecting a facet. As one worker put it in inside discussions obtained by The Post: “Employees are drunk on the absolute power of being in control of civics in America, without ever having to visit a voting booth (if voting is even an option).”
Social media now qualify for numerous authorized protections by claiming to be “neutral platforms.” Yet Big Tech is creating a robust file of suppressing the fact in the service of clear political bias. Something has to alter.