Free speech is under attack that cannot be denied – but following the seismic shift in public opinion in 2016 when we witnessed the Trump and Brexit “phenomenon” that attack appears to have gone into overdrive.
Who is attacking our right to free speech and why – let’s examine this further.
The Munich Security Conference 2020 has just taken place (who knew?).
This is a major international event bringing together hundreds of senior leaders and thinkers from politics, international organisations, business and civil society to discuss future security challenges around the world.
Boris Johnson did not attend sending instead James Cleverly and Mark Sedwill, Cabinet Secretary/Head of the Civil Service and National Security Adviser – also in attendance was Head Globalist Tony Blair.
Social media featured on the Security Agenda – Mark Zuckerberg from Facebook gave a speech entitled:-
“Social Media and Democracy – Learn Fast and Fix Things”.
“He stated the data that we’ve seen is actually that people get exposed to more diverse views through social media than they were before through traditional media and a smaller number of channels.”
Interestingly, he went on to express the concern that Western Governments have about social media – pointing out that rather than being an echo chamber a lot of social media is exposing people to views they wouldn’t otherwise have seen.
He stated Facebook takes down more than a million fake accounts a day – a vast majority relating to spam accounts NOT connected to state actors trying to interfere in elections but the number of accounts he closes are “part of that state effort”.
There are many players curtailing freedom of speech censoriously shutting down alternative viewpoints for example academia (de-platforming) mainstream media (bias/censorship) – but what Mark Zuckerberg revealed in his speech at the Munich Security Conference is very telling about the future of social media and sends a chilling message to us all.
The pressure being put upon social media platforms comes from an international level and they mean business.
The British Government are it seems a willing participant to the International Agenda – with the release of their “Online Harms” white paper calling on Ofcom to regulate social media.
The last free thinking platform will now become censored in its content.
Ofcom are allegedly impartial but have reportedly received funding from the Home Office. Another revelation is that many Ofcom employees are former BBC employees – how does that equate to impartiality?
Q1: Are “Online Harms” Differing Opinions on Global Events/State Agenda?
Why bring in a Regulator when regulation is already available with safety features such as parental control settings and the block and unfollow buttons allowing consumer control over the content they watch and whom they engage with – in a democracy the consumer should set the market should it not?
Q2: 1 million “fake/spam accounts” shut down every day – what constitutes a spam/fake account?
Why is the closing down of social media accounts part of the “state effort” Zuckerberg clearly states the accounts being closed are NOT those of state actors
Could it be the perceived threat to “democracy” is the people gaining knowledge and critical thinking leading to a change in the status quo and a shift in power?
Has Mark Zuckerberg just let the cat out of the bag – I believe he has!
This content was sourced from Unity News Network.