QOTD -- Priorities

“This is not about limiting anyone’s free speech. This is about giving people, including some of the most reprehensible people on earth, the biggest platform in history to reach a third of the planet. Freedom of speech is not freedom of reach. Sadly, there will always be racists, misogynists, anti-Semites and child abusers. But I think we could all agree that we should not be giving bigots and pedophiles a free platform to amplify their views and target their victims... if we prioritize truth over lies, tolerance over prejudice, empathy over indifference and experts over ignoramuses, then maybe, just maybe, we can stop the greatest propaganda machine in history, we can save democracy, we can still have a place for free speech and free expression, and, most importantly, my jokes will still work.” -- Sacha Baron Cohen torching Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg while accepting the Anti- Defamation League's International Leadership Award yesterday.  Cohen does a searing, compelling job of painting a broader picture of the danger of social media giants ("the Silicon six") spreading despicable lies, fear and outrage to billions around the world.  The video of Cohen's thoughtful speech is embedded at the link -- go watch it, please.

Monday Reading

As always, please go to the links for the full articles/ op eds.

The New York Times had several interrelated articles over the weekend on the use/ abuse of Twitter by the Twit- in- Chief, Donald "The Dumb Don" Trump.  Although we already sense much of what the Times is reporting, there's some exhaustive analysis of Trump's Twitter habits, including what kinds of things the moron is absorbing into his Very Good Brain:

...Mr. Trump, whose own tweets have warned of deep-state plots against him, accused the House speaker of treason and labeled Republican critics “human scum,” has helped spread a culture of suspicion and distrust of facts into the political mainstream.

The president is also awash in an often toxic torrent that sluices into his Twitter account — roughly 1,000 tweets per minute, many intended for his eyes. Tweets that tag his handle, @realDonaldTrump, can be found with hashtags like #HitlerDidNothingWrong, #IslamIsSatanism and #WhiteGenocide. While filters can block offensive material, the president clearly sees some of it, because he dips into the frothing currents and serves up noxious bits to the rest of the world.

By retweeting suspect accounts, seemingly without regard for their identity or motives, he has lent credibility to white nationalists, anti-Muslim bigots and obscure QAnon adherents like VB Nationalist, an anonymous account that has promoted a hoax about top Democrats worshiping the Devil and engaging in child sex trafficking.  [snip]

Authentic or not, the most fervent MAGA and QAnon accounts — at least 23,000 of his followers have QAnon references in their profiles — form a dependable Greek chorus that exploits the tricks of the medium to amplify the president’s message. Mr. Trump benefits from the activism of his online supporters and the platform’s algorithms, which tend to reward the most partisan content within digital communities.

But the constant exposure to the worst elements of social media poses risks. Clint Watts, a former F.B.I. agent and a cybersecurity expert who studies propaganda campaigns on social media, said the time Mr. Trump spent on Twitter “gives you an amazing opportunity to game the president.”

It's easy to game a narcissistic moron, it turns out. The other related articles are here and here.

Will Bunch has a good read about what's going on with the riots in Chile over it's world- highest level of income inequality (the U.S. is second), and how the decades- long influence of the right- wing economists of the "Chicago school" has brought their economy to this point.  He then ties it in to current U.S. politics:

And what about Chile’s rival for income inequality, the United States? While there have been significant protest movements over income inequality (Occupy Wall Street) and its symptoms (the March for Our Lives, climate strikes, the Women’s March), the last few years have shown that Americans remain a people who pin a lot of our hopes, for better or worse, on the ballot box, not on the street. As Sen. Elizabeth Warren rises in the Democratic polls and her ideological cousin Sen. Bernie Sanders enjoys something of a bounce back, the chances are growing in the United States for a political revolution that could undo Chicago Boys-style governance here at home, without damaging any subway stations in the process.

And yet this nonviolent revolution still has America’s billionaire class in a total panic.

In recent weeks, Wall Street and other big-money political funders have run to their favorite journalists -- who’ve responded with headlines like Politico’s “Corporate America freaks out over Elizabeth Warren” -- and floated delusional, desperation theories that some benevolent billionaire like former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg or some other plutocrat could still enter the 2020 race at 11:58 and somehow save their pampered skins.

“Ninety-seven percent of the people I know in my world are really, really fearful of her,” billionaire Michael Novogratz told Bloomberg (heh) News recently of Warren, but the wealthy acknowledge that every time they attack Warren, Sanders, or their proposals such as a wealth tax to fund social programs like universal prekindergarten, eliminating college debt or universal health care, it only makes the chances for their victory stronger.

That’s because you don’t need to fly a helicopter over the streets of Santiago to see that there’s a lot more of us than there are of them. The Milton Friedmans and the James Buchanans of this world were able to get away for decades with their ridiculous theories that freedom for billionaires would eventually trickle down dollars on regular folks -- until the day we woke up and discovered we didn’t even have enough change for the subway. The fires may have started in the shadow of the Andes, but you can already smell the smoke up on Wall Street.

That's a long excerpt, but there's much more at the link that deserves a read.

Eric Boehlert explores why Facebook's Mark Suckerberg Zuckerberg is so resistant to policing or removing lies being spread by Republicans on his platform:

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has been on a GOP charm offensive, and it seems to be working for the social media behemoth as it makes its allegiance to the Republican Party more open. In the days preceding his latest testimony before Congress, Zuckerberg had been "hosting a series of dinners with conservative journalists, right-wing celebrities, and at least one Republican lawmaker, Sen. Lindsey Graham, who grilled Zuckerberg about Facebook’s market dominance when he testified in a Senate hearing last year," Politico reported. Among those who attended the conservative-only dinners at Zuckerberg’s home were Fox News' Tucker Carlson, the Daily Wire’s Ben Shapiro, radio host Hugh Hewitt, Guy Benson of Townhall, and Byron York of the Washington Examiner. All of them function as public apologists for Donald Trump, who has spent years bullying Facebook for supposedly trying to "censor" conservative voices.

Facebook's reward for that outreach effort came last week when "Republican members of the committee were generally more supportive of Mr. Zuckerberg," when he appeared before Congress, The New York Times reported.

Indeed, Facebook's political transformation from a quasi-progressive outpost that revolutionized information sharing into a bullied GOP lapdog now seems complete, as the company gives Republicans a green light to use the social media platform to lie their way through Trump's re-election campaign next year and create a sea of online disinformation. "Facebook is actively helping Trump spread lies and misinformation," Elizabeth Warren warned this month. "Facebook already helped elect Donald Trump once. They might do it again—and profit off of it."

There's no question about the profit part. "Trump’s reelection campaign is far outspending other candidates on Facebook ads and boosted posts—to the tune of more than $20.7 million between May 2018 and October 2019, more than all the Democratic presidential candidates combined," Slate reports.

Zuckerberg is an image- conscious phony, so it's possible the blowback he's getting, including from his own employees, plus Twitter's decision not to have political ads on its platform, will cause him to change course. Recode's Kara Swisher is one who thinks so.  The pressure needs to stay on, though.

Our neighbors in Virginia have an important off- year election tomorrow that will determine the composition of the Virginia House of Delegates and Senate. We need three seats in the House and two in the Senate to take control.  Here's some of what that would mean:

Democratic takeovers in both legislative chambers would have far-reaching implications for the state’s policies and politics. The party, which also controls the governor’s office, would have the chance to pursue a host of liberal priorities like an increase in the state’s minimum wage, laws protecting LGBTQ rights and abortion rights and tougher gun safety regulations.

It would also mark the culmination of Virginia’s yearslong transformation from a conservative state ― which once was the seat of the Confederacy ― to a progressive one that is not only reliably Democratic in presidential elections, but whose state politics are heavily influenced by a cohort of liberal Democrats that would have been unrecognizable even a decade ago.

Vote!

As usual, we are recommending you take time to check out Infidel 753's link round- up (where we found that piece on Facebook/Zuckerberg).  His blog is worth bookmarking, if you haven't already done so!

Tweets Of The Day -- The Problem

Today, @facebook, who is still ensnared in the Cambridge Analytica scandal, added Breitbart, whose owner and former President were OWNERS of Cambridge Analytica, as a “trusted” news source.

This scandal writes itself.

— Sleeping Giants (@slpng_giants) October 25, 2019

Remember, this doesn’t just mean Facebook is credentialing Breitbart it is also subsidizing Breitbart. These Facebook approved news outlets are now all being paid. https://t.co/tuRTr9qH5g

— Josh Marshall (@joshtpm) October 26, 2019

I’m starting to think Facebook doesn’t want to solve this problem at all 🤔

— Barend 🇪🇺 (@grooveplex) October 25, 2019

I'm out of things to say on Facebook, except this. They have chosen Breitbart as a trusted news partner.

You should read this story about what Breitbart did to a city in Idaho, turning neighbors against one another, in an effort to smear immigrants.https://t.co/nGiRiWBDMG

— Ben Collins (@oneunderscore__) October 25, 2019

Monday Reading

As always, please go to the links for the full articles/ op eds.

There's been a lot of justifiable criticism of the "I'm An Important Player" speech last week by Facebook's Mark Suckerberg Zuckerberg, positioning himself as a champion of free expression.  (Check out here,  here, and here.) This is what Inc's Jason Aten has to say, in part:

It doesn't matter whether Facebook actively censors certain viewpoints, the result is actually far worse. Facebook is deciding--on your behalf yet without your input--what you should see based entirely on what it thinks is best for you. Not only do most people not want tech companies deciding what is true, I don't know anyone that wants those same companies deciding what is best for them.

I get that Facebook is in a difficult position. Its platform is enormous, and it's increasingly difficult to create policies that prevent abuses by bad actors. On the one hand, the company wants to allow free expression up to the point where it could actually cause harm. (That's Zuckerberg's explanation, anyway.) At the same time, Facebook seems to completely ignore the fact that it already directly affects which forms of expression you are exposed to every single day.

And, it does so in a way that is most profitable for itself.

That isn't free expression by any definition. And the fact that Zuckerberg publicly promoted the company's commitment to free expression without addressing that obvious fact tells you everything you need to know.

The sanctimonious little fart is determined to enable the liars and manipulators to spread their poison to the people on his platform who never bother to watch a newscast or read a paper that might disabuse them of the crap Facebook's algorithms decide to provide them.  Zuck believes in free expression as long as it's making him enormous profits.

Conservative economics columnist Robert Samuelson comes out for Trump's impeachment and removal:

The lesson of the Syrian debacle is that Trump is increasingly impervious to outside evidence and influence. No one knows what he will do, except that, reflecting his background as a reality-TV star, he aims to dominate the daily news cycle every day. This means he constantly needs new and more incendiary material. He incites his “base,” because he’s good at it and enjoys it. Inevitably, this dragged him toward impeachment.

According to the Constitution, the House first votes on the charges, which — if approved — would move to the Senate for trial, where a two-thirds majority would be required for conviction. It is widely assumed that few Republicans, if any, will support it, but events are moving so fast that this could change. I hope it does. Though scary, impeachment and removal are the lesser evils.

The corrupt decision to host the next G-7 summit at Trump's Doral roach motel bedbug palace stemmed from The Dumb Don's generous spirit, we're told:

Acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney on Sunday defended President Trump’s decision — reversed in a tweet late Saturday — to host next year’s G-7 summit at his resort hotel near Miami, saying the president “still considers himself to be in the hospitality business. [snip]

“At the end of the day he still considers himself to be in the hospitality business, and he saw an opportunity to take the biggest leaders from around the world and he wanted to put on the absolute best show, the best visit that he possibly could, and he was very comfortable doing that at Doral...”

"Hospitality business!"  Well, he's certainly not in the presidentin' business.

Here's your little piece of Huckleberry bullshit pie for today:

[Sen. Lindsey "Huckleberry"] Graham also said he believed the United States and Kurdish forces long allied with Washington could establish a venture to modernize Syrian oil fields, with the revenue flowing to the Kurds. “President Trump is thinking outside the box,” Graham said of Trump’s thinking on oil.

“The president appreciates what the Kurds have done,” Graham added. “He wants to make sure ISIS does not come back. I expect we will continue to partner with the Kurds in eastern Syria to make sure ISIS does not re-emerge.”

Trump "thinking outside the box" would suggest he's capable of thinking in the first place. Oh, and the Kurds can't wait to "partner" with Trump again, we're certain of that!

Here's a little counterprogramming to Huckleberry's vision:

A video by the Kurdish news agency showed a convoy of armored vehicles driving through the northeastern city of Qamishli. People in the street hurled potatoes at the vehicles, shouting, "No America," and "America liar," in English.

"Like rats, America is running away," one man shouted in Arabic. Another shouted obscenities and talked of babies in Kurdish-held who have died in the Turkish offensive.

Partners!

As usual, we'd strongly recommend a visit to our blogging brother Infidel 753's excellent link round- up for much more variety and scope than what we can provide here.

Tweets Of The Day -- Appeasement

Frightened Facebook weasel buckles under pressure:

NEW: Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has been hosting secretive talks & off-the-record dinners with conservative influencers in recent months to discuss free speech and partnerships. Among the participants: Tucker Carlson & Lindsey Graham. scoop w/@dlippman:https://t.co/n5IV0N66X4

— Natasha Bertrand (@NatashaBertrand) October 14, 2019

Facebook has come under fire recently for its ad policy, which considers politicians’ claims as "ineligible" for third-party fact checking. In keeping with that policy, FB has allowed a Trump campaign ad making false claims about Biden’s ties to Ukraine to remain on the platform.

— Natasha Bertrand (@NatashaBertrand) October 14, 2019

Said 1 source: “The discussion in Silicon Valley is that Zuckerberg is very concerned about Barr's DOJ bringing an enforcement action to break up the company. So the fear is Zuckerberg is trying to appease the Trump administration by not cracking down on right-wing propaganda.”

— Natasha Bertrand (@NatashaBertrand) October 14, 2019

Each dinner has been hosted at one of Zuckerberg’s homes in CA. The conversations center around “free expression, unfair treatment of conservatives, the appeals process for real or perceived unfair treatment, fact checking, partnerships, and privacy." https://t.co/n5IV0N66X4

— Natasha Bertrand (@NatashaBertrand) October 14, 2019

As someone noted somewhere, being on Facebook in the next year will be like sitting in front of a t.v. set to Fox "News."

"Dear Mr. Zuckerberg..."

The parents of a Sandy Hook elementary school victim have something to say to amoral Facebook founder Mark "F*ckerberg" Zuckerberg:

Dear Mr Zuckerberg,  

Our names are Lenny Pozner and Veronique De La Rosa. We are the parents of Noah, who on 14 December, 2012, at the age of six, was gunned down in his classroom at Sandy Hook elementary school. Since that day, we, as well as the parents, family, and friends of the 25 other victims, have been embroiled in a constant battle with social media providers, including Facebook, to protect us from harassment and threats. [snip] 

While terms you use, like “fake news” or “fringe conspiracy groups”, sound relatively innocuous, let me provide you with some insight into the effects of allowing your platform to continue to be used as an instrument to disseminate hate. We have endured online, telephone, and in-person harassment, abuse, and death threats. In fact, one of the abusers was sentenced to jail for credible death threats that she admitted in court she had uttered because she believed in online content created by these “fringe groups”. In order to protect ourselves and our surviving children, we have had to relocate numerous times. These groups use social media, including Facebook, to “hunt” us, posting our home address and videos of our house online. We are currently living in hiding. We are far from alone in our experiences, as many other families who have lost loved ones in mass shootings and other tragedies have reported the same continuing torment. 

Our families are in danger as a direct result of the hundreds of thousands of people who see and believe the lies and hate speech, which you have decided should be protected. What makes the entire situation all the more horrific is that we have had to wage an almost inconceivable battle with Facebook to provide us with the most basic of protections to remove the most offensive and incendiary content.

You can read the entire, heartbreaking open letter here.

A main purveyor of the Sandy Hook hoax hate speech is, of course, Alex Jones -- who also recently made threats of physical violence against Special Counsel Robert Mueller via Facebook and YouTube.  That, too, is apparently something F*ckerberg considers not violating Facebook's rules.

Facebook and F*ckerberg are not your friends.

Also, what Chris Hayes said:

Facebook is the equivalent of a massively profitable factory that just dumps all of its waste into the river and never has to pay for the cost to clean it up.

— Chris Hayes (@chrislhayes) July 25, 2018

BONUS:  Sad!  Facebook's stock plummeted 23% today in after- hours trading based on lower quarterly earnings than expected. F*ckerberg personally lost $17.6 billion in the sell off.  Sweet.