In the 11 December 2018 Trends Journal article, “CENSORSHIP 2019,” we forecast the proliferation of internet censorship across the globe:

“Freedom of speech? Freedom of Expression? Forget about it! From the United States to China, from New Zealand to Nepal, Censorship is a megatrend. For well over a year, social media giants and governments have been silencing voices that challenge establishment agendas.”

In our 21 January 2020 issue, we doubled down on the forecast, stating:

Our “Censorship” Top Trend of 2019 has now become a way of life: unchallenged and barely reported by the mainstream media, who are included among social media giants as the chief censors banning those who don’t tow their party lines and special interests.

As the Trends Journal has been warning for years, Silicon Valley is silencing users on the internet who dare challenging the official narrative. Unfortunately, ever since the politicians and Presstitutes started the COVID War, censorship has increased dramatically.
The degree of censorship muzzling the globe is now potentially so comprehensive that it poses an imminent threat to the fundamental concept of freedom.
The mainstream media has been spreading alarm about the decentralized distribution of news. The mainstream concern is evidenced by a 17 October New York Times article that begins:

“There’s a disease that has been spreading for years now. Like any resilient virus, it evolves to find new ways to attack us. It’s not in our bodies, but on the web.

It has different names: misinformation, disinformation or distortions.”

The article goes on,

“The rise of false news is bad news for all of us. Misinformation can be a detriment to our well-being in a time when people are desperately seeking information such as health guidelines to share with loved ones about Coronavirus.”

In response to the decline of traditional media’s influence coupled with the rising popularity of independent media on the internet, BigTech (perhaps working under the protection of corrupt politicians) is now heading the all-out assault on free speech. Google, Linkedin, Twitter, Facebook, Amazon, YouTube, etc. have all ramped up their censorship efforts.
Recently Gerald Celente was censored by Linkedin for this message:

According to the Linkedin Trust & Safety Team, Gerald Celente’s freedom of speech was curbed because the comment “goes against [Linkedin’s] policy on bullying and harassment”
YouTube has also censored the Trends Journal by placing the following warning on the video of Dr. Amandha Vollmer’s speech at the Occupy Peace & Freedom “Unite for Peace & Freedom Rally” held on July 4th.

In addition to intimidating potential viewers with scary-looking warnings, YouTube has been demonetizing many “controversial” videos. (A “demonetized” video is not eligible to receive ad revenue.) By eliminating the ability to receive revenue, demonetization discourages creators from spending the time and effort necessary to produce quality content.
Other channels on YouTube fared much worse when they were eliminated/taken down from YouTube’s website, thereby destroying countless hours of work when channels simply “disappeared.”
To avoid the remuneration restriction imposed by YouTube, many content creators turned to payment services like Patreon or PayPal in the hopes of maintaining income. Not surprisingly, in lockstep with their BigTech cohorts, these services have restricted many independent content creators from utilizing their payment processes.
The founder of SGT Report, a friend of the Trends Journal, recently had his YouTube and Patreon accounts terminated. He had spent over three years amassing an audience of nearly 750,000 members, only to have it all vanish in a week.

Even those who are not seeking any income and are just trying to spread the truth are being heavily discouraged and censored.
Facebook recently altered its censorship policies despite stating that they would not do so until after the election. The New York Times reported on 17 October:

“At Facebook, the recent policy changes have grabbed attention partly because the company said on Sept. 3 that it did not plan to make changes to its site until after the election. ‘To ensure there are clear and consistent rules, we are not planning to make further changes to our election-related policies between now and the official declaration of the result,’ Mr. Zuckerberg wrote in a blog post at the time.

Yet just weeks later, the changes started coming rapidly. On Oct. 6 Facebook expanded its takedown of the QAnon conspiracy group. A day later it said it would ban political advertising until after the polls closed on Election Day, with the ban lasting an undetermined length of time.

Days later, Mr. Zuckerberg said Facebook would no longer allow Holocaust deniers to post their views on the site. And less than 24 hours, after that the company said it would disallow advertising related to anti-vaccination theories.”

The grip is so tight at Facebook that employees are afraid to speak out. The New York Post recently reported that disgruntled workers are forced to vent on anonymous platforms like Blind (a chatroom that requires a company email to sign in but then hides that login information.)
One employee claimed, “[Facebook] employees want Trump to lose. If that means rigging [the platform] against him, they don’t care.”
Another employee stated, “The whole thing [Facebook] is run by super-woke millennials and gen Xers.” It was also noted that some “apolitical” employees were the target of bullying and harassment for not being “woke” enough.
Facebook’s censorship policy is especially preposterous considering just a few years ago the platform acted as an online arms bazaar spreading weaponry across Libya and North Africa.
Twitter generally has been considered less regulated than Facebook, but, recently, Twitter has attracted national attention for its censorship policies. In October, Twitter censored President Trump for his tweet about his COVID recovery:

“A total and complete sign off from White House Doctors yesterday. That means I can’t get it (immune) and can’t give it. Very nice to know!!!”

President Trump was flagged for violating rules about “spreading misinformation and potentially harmful information related to COVID-19.”
Similarly, Dr. Scott Atlas, Chief of Neuroradiology at Stanford University Medical Center, was censored by Twitter for sharing scientific studies about the inefficacy of masks.
With the election approaching, Twitter’s information control has expanded to the political sphere. The New York Post recently broke a story concerning shady payments between the Biden family and international governments. Twitter reacted by immediately censoring the story (without fact checking it) and blocking the accounts of several users who had shared the story, including several politicians and the editor of the Post.
Twitter’s policies seemed so one-sided, Matthew Berry, Chief of Staff at the Federal Communications Commission, was prompted to point out that the Supreme Leader of Iran has been tweeting while the New York Post account has been locked.
The domestic censorship has also attracted the attention of Missouri Senator Josh Hawley. Senator Hawley notes that the Republicans have been complicit in the BigTech takeover. Hawley has been in the senate for 22 months, and he has sponsored 15 bills targeting BigTech’s overreach (including measures that would allow the public to sue the tech giants), only to be met by bipartisan eye-rolling. Mr. Hawley notes the “establishment’s anti-trust agenda is aimed at weakening rather than strengthening the laws we need to combat these threats to our democracy.”
In the event the government is not in lockstep with Twitter, the company’s decision to censor the Biden story could result in legal consequences if it is proved that the act of censorship constitutes a political contribution. Adding further intrigue to this angle, Twitter staffers involved in the censorship have pre-existing professional relationships linking them to Biden and Harris.
The implications of a handful of power-hungry, elitist nerds manipulating public opinion should alarm all human beings. The issue is not whether you support Gerald Celente, President Trump, or the New York Post. It is whether you support freedom of speech… or not.
By Stephen Green

Comments are closed.

Skip to content