[ad_1]
They are the highest level of moral narcissists, but they are more dangerous because they think they are good people. They are convinced that they are helping the world to make sure that we, the ignorant people below, are not promoted by what they believe to be “false” or “incorrect” information, but in fact it is they who use various forms of censorship to attack freedom of expression.
Jack Dorsey from Twitter responded to Senator Cory Gardner (Cory Gardner) with a ridiculous scene. It showed that denying the Holocaust does not fit Twitter’s definition of “incorrect” information, and obviously The New York Post’s report on Tony Bobulinski’s widely certified emails (revealing Biden and his son) met the definition. Twitter account of “incorrect” information.
Dorsey also told Sen. Marsha Blackburn that her website did not censor the president’s tweets, which they have done dozens of times.
However, the most blatant Orwellian excuse is that Dorsey said that Twitter had no influence on the election. (So why do you bother censoring the New York Post?)
The performance of Google and Facebook is at least disturbing, and their power is even greater.
In a way that even the Chinese (the CCP) would envy, “unscrupulous means to achieve goals” have come to America through invisible algorithms. These algorithms determine the content that is displayed on our laptops and mobile phones, and soon it affects everything else.
But what should we do?
I suggest a two-pronged approach, one is legislation and the other is individual / consumer orientation. I think the latter may ultimately be more effective, but both are necessary.
From a legal perspective, Blackburn, Josh Hawley, and several other senators (some of them Democrats) are trying to completely amend Article 230, which protects websites like Facebook and Twitter. The content of the link was sued. The rule was formulated more than 20 years ago, in Internet terms, in the early Paleolithic, the author of the rule could not have imagined such a point, these websites have become publishers.
In fact, they are now essentially the administrative editors of world news and thus are also the custodians of most of the information around the world. In a sense, what they say is fact is fact. In the digital age, what could be more powerful than this?
We must strongly support the rewriting of Section 230 to allow these giants to be prosecuted just like us Grub Street residents. This is possible, and there is no doubt that some of them will agree, but sadly, the number of members is far from sufficient.
It should be possible to study and rewrite antitrust law in earnest, but if Trump doesn’t win, it is extremely unlikely. Even if he wins, it will be very difficult, because the deepest pocket in Washington, indeed the deepest pocket in the world, belongs to the tech giants. Like “money is the mother’s milk of politics,” then you know the rest …
consumer
My fellow citizens, let me turn to the second method, what we can and should do: the consumer approach.
We can leave Google, Twitter and Facebook, almost in this order. If we have enough people, we can cut their profits and generate competition.
For some or many of us, this means a fundamental change in our lives, or at least we fear it will change. But as the saying goes, fate favors brave people.
Google is the easiest because it has an alternative available. I’m proud to say that I left Google (well, to be honest, it took me a while) to use DuckDuckGo instead. In most cases, I find it equally useful, although sometimes (like a quick search for sports results), I still go back to Google. (I’m a bit like someone who is gradually quitting.)
Although DDG is not perfect, DDG is quite good for increasingly important privacy issues. Google has tracked so many things on its own and for the benefit of no one knows who it is. In a sense, behind the seemingly bland mask, Google is our own Chinese version of the “social credit” system. It is said that the CCP was once suggested to restrict search engines, but this is no accident.
Switch to DuckDuckGo to make yourself feel better. Also, this will help you improve and become a true competitor to Google. There are rumors that Google received funding from the CIA and / or the National Security Agency at an early stage.
Getting off Twitter is more complicated and sometimes more difficult, because it is like addiction to cocaine for politicians and journalists. Many of us, including me, find it hard to quit, for fear of missing something there, even though we know that Twitter is arbitrarily unfair.
A few years ago, more than 10,000 of my followers suddenly disappeared from my account – that was what I said – but I was ashamed to say that I later sent an email to the Twitter company to ask for an explanation but did not receive After responding, I continued ahead. Around the same time, there was one person I had a lot of respect for, Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit (who maintains the famous political blog), he had a lot more followers than me and he left Twitter with courage and integrity. But I can not.
To be fair, there is one thing Twitter is great about. When a catastrophic event occurs (earthquake, terrorist attack, etc.), you can learn a lot from your local reports, which are often much faster than the media. Few people know if they are accurate, but they are really interesting and often more truthful than media reports.
However, by staying on Twitter, you are feeding this monster. The main problem is that your best alternative, Parler, is not what it should be. It is too much like a conservative echo chamber. It requires you to “reply” to other people’s posts as a very obvious sign. (You’ll get too many nonsensical posts like “Respond to your love for Donald Trump Jr.”).
While it is understandable that we Twitter refugees (including myself) can get some relief, the “safe space” of this right-wing version of social justice fighters is not what we, or others, need or we should need for a long time or now. from.
I look forward to seeing Parler evolve into what Twitter should have been all along: a website that welcomes everyone and is uncensored. Parler has done a good job with the censorship system, but understandably he has not done so well with “everyone.” You also need some technical beautification, a user-friendly interface.
However, I will be there and continue to contribute. Not only will I complain, but I’ll do my best to help you.
At the same time, I plan to leave Twitter as of November 4, the day after the election. I think I can quit smoking, but I guess it’s more like quitting drugs. First divide it in two, then divide it in two, and so on, until you completely stop smoking, this way is more suitable.
As for Facebook, sadly I don’t have a direct answer, at least there is still no clear alternative.
Mark Zuckerberg won thanks to the well-known “first-mover advantage.” But we must not let him stay in that position.
Remember another motto: “When you build it, people will come to sponsor it.”
The original The Two Approaches Needed to End the Dominance of Big Technology was published in the English edition “The Epoch Times.”
About the Author:
Roger L. Simon is an award-winning novelist, Oscar-nominated screenwriter, and co-founder of PJ Media. His most recent book is “I Know Best: How Moral Narcissism Is Destroying Our Republic, If It Hasn’t Already Done” (non-fiction)) and “The GOAT” (novel).
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.
Editor in Charge: Gao Jing #
