UNSTOPPABLE: Trump Message Continues On Social Media Despite Ban, Says Report

WASHINGTON (Washington Examiner) — Despite a ban from most major platforms, former President Donald Trump‘s online statements are reportedly spreading far and wide on social media.

Many of Trump’s statements after his January social media ban have received as many, if not more, likes or shares online as they did before, according to an analysis published Monday by the New York Times.

Before his ban, due to his role in the Jan. 6 Capitol attack, Trump’s social media engagement generated a median of 272,000 likes and shares, primarily on Facebook and Twitter. After the ban, his median engagement dropped to 36,000 likes and shares, but 11 of his 89 statements in the past few months have been either just as popular or more popular than before the ban.

The top sharers of some of Trump’s statements after his social media ban include Breitbart News, a Facebook page called “President Donald Trump Fan Club,” Fox News, and Jenna Ellis, a member of Trump’s legal team who was roundly defeated in court in 2020 election fraud lawsuits.

Sometimes, when Trump criticized conservatives, his statements would get shared widely by those on both ends of the political spectrum and mainstream publications. Top sharers of his statements on the Left include popular Facebook page “Stand With Mueller” and CNN journalist Jim Acosta.

However, Trump’s claims of widespread election fraud were 17 times less popular after his social media ban because of efforts by Facebook and Twitter to curb political misinformation.

“As the Trump case shows, deplatforming doesn’t ‘solve’ disinformation, but it does disrupt harmful networks and blunt the influence of harmful individuals,” Emerson Brooking, a fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab, told theTimes.

Trump’s statements that got the most traction on social media in the past few monthswere his posts on culture, like his boycott of baseball; his praise for certain conservatives, such as radio host Rush Limbaugh; and his criticism of President Joe Biden on political issues related to the border crisis and taxes.


The Washington Times’ Nihal Krisham contributed to the contents of this report.

Justice Clarence Thomas Ruling Leads The Way To Ending Social Media Censorship

WASHINGTON (The Federalist) —

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas offered a roadmap to eliminating rampant social media censorship from online monopolies on Monday.

In a ruling for writ of certiorari on the case of President Joe Biden v. Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, Thomas concurred in an opinion to send the case back to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit with instructions to dismiss as moot, now that Biden is in the White House. The case, launched in August, questions whether the First Amendment strips government officials of their ability to block third-party accounts on Twitter if the personal account is used to conduct official business. The lower court ruled Trump violated the First Amendment when blocking users on the platform, which served as a public forum.

“I write separately to note that this petition highlights the principal legal difficulty that surrounds digital platforms,” Thomas wrote, “namely, that applying old doctrines to new digital platforms is rarely straightforward.”

Thomas went on to outline a blueprint for breaking up protections that enable corporate tech monopolies to engage in widespread censorship frequently in one direction. The conservative justice’s argument rests primarily on the monopoly power Big Tech conglomerates possess in Silicon Valley, where unilateral control of the public forum means no real public forum at all.

“It seems rather odd to say that something is a government forum when a private company has unrestricted authority to do away with it,” Thomas wrote. “The disparity between Twitter’s control and Mr. Trump’s control is stark, to say the least.”

In January, Twitter kicked then-President Trump from the platform altogether.

“Today’s digital platforms provide avenues for historically unprecedented amounts of speech, including speech by government actors,” Thomas emphasized. “Also unprecedented, however, is the concentrated control of so much speech in the hands of a few private parties. We will soon have no choice but to address how our legal doctrines apply to highly concentrated, privately owned information infrastructure such as digital platforms.”

Aside from Twitter, Thomas highlighted the dominant influence of Google and Amazon. Google, Thomas noted, serves as the “gatekeeper” between users and speech with power over 90 percent of internet searches.

“It can suppress content by deindexing or downlisting a search result or by steering users away from certain content by manually altering autocomplete results,” Thomas wrote. Amazon, meanwhile, as the distributor of a majority of e-books and half of all physical books, “can impose cataclysmic consequences on authors by, among other things, blocking a listing.”

Earlier this year, Amazon deplatformed conservative scholar Ryan T. Anderson and his book “When Harry Became Sally: Responding to the Transgender Moment,” a book critical of the left’s efforts to mainstream transgenderism to a radical degree.

Now, when users search Anderson’s book title into Amazon, it’s not his book that shows up. Instead, it’s a work titled “Let Harry Become Sally: Responding to the Anti-Transgender Moment.”

Thomas himself has fallen victim to Amazon’s censorship. In February, during Black History Month, the company removed a documentary about the only black justice currently serving on the Supreme Court from its streaming service.

The PBS title, “Created Equal: Clarence Thomas in His Own Words,” appeared ripped from the platform while Amazon still promoted other titles under the category of Black History Month, such as “All In: The Fight For Democracy,” with Stacey Abrams, and two movies on Anita Hill, Thomas’s accuser of sexual misconduct who attempted to derail his confirmation.

“It changes nothing that these platforms are not the sole means for distributing speech or information,” Thomas wrote. “But in assessing whether a company exercises substantial market power, what matters is whether the alternatives are comparable. For many of today’s digital platforms, nothing is.”

The Federalist’s Tristan Thomas contributed to the contents of this report.


FED UP POTUS TO SCOTUS: ‘Let Me Block Haters On Twitter’

WASHINGTON (AP)– President Donald Trump is asking the Supreme Court to allow him to block critics from his personal Twitter account.

The administration said in a high-court filing Thursday that Trump’s @realdonaldtrump account with more than 85 million followers is his personal property and blocking people from it is akin to elected officials who refuse to allow their opponents’ yard signs on their front lawns.

“President Trump’s ability to use the features of his personal Twitter account, including the blocking function, are independent of his presidential office,” acting Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall wrote in urging the justices to review the case.

The federal appeals court in New York ruled last year that Trump uses the account to make daily pronouncements and observations that are overwhelmingly official in nature. It held that Trump violated the First Amendment whenever he blocked a critic to silence a viewpoint.

A decision about whether even to hear the case is not likely before the November election.

The case grew out of a challenge brought by the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, which sued on behalf of seven individuals blocked by Trump after criticizing his policies.

Jameel Jaffer, the Knight Institute’s executive director, said the justices should decline to take up Trump’s appeal.

“This case stands for a principle that is fundamental to our democracy and basically synonymous with the First Amendment: government officials can’t exclude people from public forums simply because they disagree with their political views,” Jaffer said in a statement.

The administration argued in its appeal that the Supreme Court, not lower courts, “should decide where to draw the line between the President’s personal decisions and official conduct.”

The pace of the case was slowed by the coronavirus pandemic as well as Trump’s decision to ask the full 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to review the ruling by a three-judge panel. The court refused to do so by a 7-2 vote in March. Two Trump appointees, Judges Michael H. Park and Richard J. Sullivan, were the only members of the court to side with the president.

The Supreme Court extended its deadline to file an appeal from 90 days to 150 days when it shut the building to the public and abandoned in-person meetings in favor of telephone conferences because of the virus outbreak.


Mark Sherman of The Associated Press contributed to the contents of this report.

TICK TOCK: Gaetz Steps Up Attack Against Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg Alleging Lies To Congress

WASHINGTON — Rep. Matt Gaetz has filed a criminal referral against Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg for lying to Congress while under oath, the Florida Republican announced this week.

In a statement, Gaetz alleged that Zuckerberg made materially false statements to Congress while under oath at two separate joint hearings in April 2018.

“Zuckerberg repeatedly and categorically denied his company engaged in bias against conservative speech, persons, policies, or politics and also denied that Facebook censored and suppressed content supportive of President Donald Trump and other conservatives,” the statement reads. Gaetz then went on to allege that James O’Keefe, along with investigative journalists at Project Veritas, uncovered evidence which proved contrary.

“Zuckerberg repeatedly and categorically denied his company engaged in bias against conservative speech, persons, policies, or politics and also denied that Facebook censored and suppressed content supportive of President Donald Trump and other conservatives,” Gaetz argued. “Project Veritas published the results of an undercover investigation featuring two whistleblowers who worked as Facebook’s ‘content moderators,’ revealing that the overwhelming majority of content filtered by Facebook’s AI program was content in support of President Donald Trump, Republican candidates for office, or conservatism in general.”

“This alone is already an indication of bias within the platform,” he added.

In the statement, Gaetz went on to say that he now “questions Zuckerberg’s veracity, as well as his willingness to cooperate with the House’s oversight authority,” and suggested that the Facebook CEO has been “diverting congressional resources during time-sensitive investigations, and materially impeding our work.”

“Such misrepresentations are not only unfair, they are potentially illegal and fraudulent,” said Gaetz.

In addition to referring Zuckerberg to the DOJ for an investigation into the alleged false statements made to Congress by Zuckerberg while under oath, Gaetz personally asked U.S. Attorney General William Barr on Monday to investigate Zuckerberg’s conduct.

“Facebook’s AI screening content is not politically neutral,” Gaetz wrote in a letter to Barr. “Neither are the moderators hired to review content flagged by the AI program. This stands in opposition to Mr. Zuckerberg’s congressional testimony and violates the ‘good faith’ provision of Section 230(c)(2)(A) of the Communications Decency Act.”

“Accordingly, I respectfully refer Mr. Zuckerberg to the Department for an investigation of potential violations of 18 U.S.C. §§1001, 1505, and 1621 for materially false statements made to Congress while testifying under oath.”

When asked about whether Facebook harbors anti-conservative bias while testifying before Congress in 2018, Zuckerberg said:

“First, I understand where that concern is coming from because Facebook and the tech industry are located in Silicon Valley, which is an extremely left-leaning place. And this is actually a concern that I have and that I try to root out in the company is making sure that we don’t have any bias in the work that we do, and I think it is a fair concern that people would at least wonder about.”

TRUMP JR.: Facebook, Twitter Using Power to ‘Manipulate’ 2020 Election

WASHINGTON — Left leaning social media sites such as Twitter and Facebook are unfairly targeting conservatives, Donald Trump, Jr. said Tuesday, and something, he says, needs to be done about it.

In an interview with Fox Business’ Maria Bartiromo, Trump said the censoring of conservatives by major social media platforms is a violation of free speech.

“It’s people who are pro-life, it’s people who are pro-Second Amendment, the religious right, I mean it’s happened to me on numerous occasions,” Trump Jr. said. “I got targeted for hate speech, but it turns out I was right,” he said. “That didn’t stop the mainstream media from, you know, dragging me through the mud for three or four days but you know that’s what’s going on.”

Facebook and Twitter are “controlled by leftists … they all believe in one thing and it’s not free speech,” said Trump. “They only believe in their speech, you know, you can only be woke. If you’re not woke, again a cancellable offense.”

Trump went on to say that social media platforms such as Twitter and Facebook are also doing whatever they can to prevent his father, President Donald Trump, from winning re-election.

They’re “doing whatever they can to manipulate an election,” Trump claimed, by making sure “certain content is pushed and others’ is totally stymied and that’s not right … they gotta lose those protections and the liability that’s probably worth billions of dollars in terms of protection to them from our federal government because taxpayers shouldn’t be funding their own suppression.”

WAR ON CONSERVATIVES: Twitter on ‘Dangerous Path,’ Could Face Regulation, Says Gingrich

WASHINGTON — After years of complaints by users who claimed they’d been unfairly targeted for their conservative beliefs, social media giants like Twitter may finally be held liable, says former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.

Responding to the backlash following Twitter’s labeling of President Donald Trump’s tweets about mail in ballots being a danger to democracy as being fact checked untrue, Gingrich said left leaning social media platforms such as Twitter and Facebook could find themselves becoming a “regulated public institution” rather than a private company.

These companies are “going down a very dangerous path” Gingrich told Fox News’ “America’s Newsroom” on Wednesday. “What Twitter called fact-check is not true,” Gingrich said. “They went to left-wing publications to get a left-wing version.”

“The president is correct,” Gingrich in defense of the president’s argument. “We have seen a lot of theft of vote, we have seen a lot of mail being lost. There are all sorts of challenges with going through an all-mail program for voting.”

“You look at some of these people, and they are totally out of touch with everyday America,” said Gingrich. “I think that at some point they are going to run a real risk of having some interventions that I don’t want to see happen, but you can’t have a free speech dominated by an institution which is determined only to allow [one] side to speak.”

And it’s not just Twitter, or simply aimed at the president, Gingrich warned. “Facebook, Google, and Twitter have a track record of becoming more anti-conservative, so it’s not all about Trump.”

“It’s anyone in America who has a traditional value and a traditional sense of patriotism or a sense of American history,” said Gingrich. “All of them are under siege in the social media groups.”

‘ENOUGH!’: Trump Vows to ‘Close Down’ Social Media Platforms That Censor Conservatives

WASHINGTON — Fed up with what he declared efforts to “silence conservatives voices,” President Donald Trump on Wednesday threatened to shut down social media platforms that target Republicans.

The move comes after Twitter added fact-check labels to a pair of Trump’s tweets on Tuesday in which the president claimed there is no way “mail-in ballots will be anything less than substantially fraudulent.” The labels Twitter attached claimed the tweets “contain potentially misleading information about voting processes” and were put in place “to provide additional contest around mail-in ballots.”

“Republicans feel that Social Media Platforms totally silence conservatives voices. We will strongly regulate, or close them down, before we can ever allow this to happen. We saw what they attempted to do, and failed, in 2016,” Trump tweeted in responses to the labeling. “We can’t let a more sophisticated version of that happen again. Just like we can’t let large scale Mail-In Ballots take root in our Country. It would be a free for all on cheating, forgery and the theft of Ballots. Whoever cheated the most would win. Likewise, Social Media. Clean up your act, NOW!!!!”

High profile conservatives have long complained of unjust practices by social media platforms such as Twitter and Facebook, claiming that their accounts were censored, removed from view and unfairly banned.

In an appearance on Fox News, Republican Sen. Josh Hawley complained of special protections put in place to shield tech companies, many of which receive federal funding, from being sued for such practices. “They get this special immunity, this special immunity from suits and from liability that’s worth billions of dollars to them every year. Why are they getting subsidized by federal taxpayers to censor conservatives, to censor people critical of China?”

STOP THE BIAS: Political commentator Jacob Wohl becomes latest casualty in Twitter’s war on conservatives

SAN FRANCISCO — Jacob Wohl became the latest conservative to be banned by Twitter Tuesday after the social media giant suspended his account, claiming the 21-year-old had violated it’s platform’s rules.

Wohl, an outspoken supporter of Israel and President Donald Trump, had garnered more than 180,000 followers prior to his ban.

“The account was suspended for multiple violations of the Twitter Rules,” a Twitter spokesperson said Tuesday, “specifically creating and operating fake accounts.”

Wohl denied those allegations when reached by USA Today for comment on Tuesday.

“I’ve had accounts for my businesses and my future think tank but that’s about it,” Wohl said, adding that all of those accounts had been “nuked” as a result of his suspension. “I’ve not created fake accounts or bot armies or anything like that.”

Wohl is just the latest in a series of conservative commentators and outspoken Trump supporters to be banned by Twitter.

In late 2018 Twitter permanently suspended the account of Laura Loomer, another outspoken supporter of Israel and Trump.

Loomer, who had amassed more than 260,000 followers on the social-media platform prior to her suspension, was banned for “violating Twitter rules against hateful conduct” after she sent a tweet criticizing Minnesota Rep.-elect Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) for her Muslim faith.

In the tweet in question, Loomer called Omar “anti-Jewish” and called the Muslim religion one in which “homosexuals are oppressed” and “women are abused” and “forced to wear the hijab.”

“I’ve been silenced in America,” Loomer said in a video posted to YouTube in response to her Twitter ban. “Everything I said is 100 percent true and factual. It’s not malicious, it’s not mean, it’s not hateful.”

In 2018 Twitter was also one of several major social media networks to suspend Alex Jones from their platform.

Jones’ suspension came one day after the Texas-based talk show host tweeted a video of himself confronting a CNN reporter and accusing him of censorship.

In a statement posted to its website, Twitter claimed Jones’ actions violated its platform’s rules against “abusive behavior.”

jacobwohl1

BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING: Facebook creating tool that will allow it to put cameras, microphones in user homes

SAN FRANCISCO, CA — In a turn of events that mimics George Orwell’s ‘1984’, social media giant Facebook is developing a gadget that will allow it to place cameras and microphones in the homes of Facebook users.

According to a report published by Cheddar (https://cheddar.com/videos/exclusive-facebook-dives-into-home-device-market-with-video-chat-product-named-portal), the social media network is preparing to release the hardware, called Portal, which was developed by a Facebook department called Building 8. The same department, says the report, is also working on developing “mind-reading technology”.

“Rather than position the device as a smart assistant akin to Amazon’s Echo speakers, Facebook intends to pitch Portal as a way for families and friends to stay connected through video chatting and other social features,’ the report states. “Facebook plans a formal product introduction in early May at its annual developer conference and hopes to ship the device in the second half of 2018.”

Although Facebook has not officially commented on the forthcoming project, Andrew Bosworth, the company’s vice president of augmented and virtual reality, wrote on Twitter: ‘Can’t comment on speculation but can confirm it’s going to be an exciting year for AR/VR’.

facebookwatching

PC GONE WILD: Kelloggs to do away with ‘racist’ Corn Pops design after complaint

BATTLE CREEK, MI — The Kelloggs company announced on Thursday that it will be overhauling the design on its famous Corn Pops box after a consumer complained calling the graphic “racist”.

The company declared on Twitter that it will be replacing the cover drawing of cartoon characters occupying a shopping mall after a man named Saladin Ahmed pointed out that a single brown corn pop was seemingly depicted as working as a janitor.

“Why is literally the only brown corn pop on the whole cereal box the janitor? this is teaching kids racism,” Ahmed tweeted to the company.

Kellogg’s tweeted a response 5 hours later stating: “Kellogg is committed to diversity & inclusion. We did not intend to offend – we apologize. The artwork is updated & will be in stores soon.”

In a separate statement, Kellogg’s spokesperson Kris Charles said, “We take feedback very seriously, and it was never our intention to offend anyone. We apologize sincerely.”

The company’s decision to pull the design sparked a mix of praise and backlash on social media, with many claiming that both Ahmed and Kelloggs were fanning the flames of racial division.

“#CornPops idiots all idiots if you look at a picture and see a race then you my friends are the RACIST” read one tweet.

“This company is participating in the ridiculousness of this accusation by validating it with a response! #kellogs #cornpops #racist,” read another.

Still another person tweeted, “What’s wrong? Is being a janitor a bad thing? Or is it that the dark pop is the only one wearing clothes and with a job?”

In reply to Kellogg’s addressing his complaint, Ahmed said he was “pleased” with the decision to remove the “offensive” Corn Pop and thanked the company for their “swift response”.

kelloggs