Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That used to be the First Amendment. Today, however, it is becoming more and more common to censor and gag people who try to use the First Amendment to list their grievances with the government. More so, to try to disagree with those that are genuinely censoring their ability to disagree.
According to Western Journal, Facebook eliminated “over 559 political pages and 251 accounts in a clamp down on what the social media company calls “inauthentic behavior” in the lead-up to the midterm elections.” Groups such as Right Wing News, Molon Labe Industries, and Overpasses For America have been completely eliminated from the Face Book platform.
For a complete List, click here:
Twitter engineers have admitted to shadow banning many conservative opinions, the censorship has reached such a fervent pitch that the Supreme court is going to hear a case that could determine whether social media users can challenge the social media behemoths.
While the First Amendment is meant to protect citizens against government attempts to limit speech, there are certain situations in which private companies can be subject to First Amendment liability.
Red Hot Media vehemently disagrees with the policies of Southern Poverty Law Center, who is currently being used to check if groups are considered to be racist. They are used by Social Media Giants to validate if people belong to a “hate group. In an article they posted in 2017, the brag in bold letters, Twitter has dropped the “verified” status from alt-right leaders Richard Spencer, organizers Laura Loomis and Jason Kessler, English Defence League Founder Tommy Robinson and others.
Southern Poverty Law Center has a hate map encompassing the entire United States, but according to their map, there are mostly conservative groups listed. According to the Washington Times, Antifa, the anti-fascist fascist group, known for destroying public property, disrupting free speech, and setting fires to buildings do decry, racism, are not considered to be a hate group. “You can find conservative policy centers like the Family Research Council on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s “hate map,” but not the violent left-wing extremist group antifa.”
The Main Stream Media CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, are already overwhelmingly covering a political view that goes contrary to conservative principles, and now with the censorship of those viewpoints, from social media, it is challenging to discover information relevant and factual for a more conservative viewer.
In fact, in a leaked document, published by David Brock of Media Matters, he lays out a plan to destroy conservative outlets. In their policy paper, they openly admit they are collaborating with Facebook and other social media outlets to stop what they opine as “fake news”.
This begs the question, should social media have the right to ban groups that disagree and challenges their platform? Red Hot Media firmly believes that all Americans should have the right to disagree, even vigorously if need be. However, threats against life, liberty, commerce have no place in a social media platform. We believe that everyone, regardless of religion, race, political agenda, should have the ability to petition any disagreement openly and fairly. Is it not the viewer to determine if the news they are reading is fake? To subscribe to the contrary, would be the equivalent of having proof of UFO landing, only to have it later declared as fake news, when in fact, a UFO did land.
News organizations and outlets, who censor outlets for posting what they determine is “fake news” needs to consider the ramifications of their actions. There have been several outlets who have posted and had censored stories later to be discovered as truthful. While we at RHM do not advocate for fake news, we do NOT believe in their censorship.