Social Media is Dictating your Morality to you

Facebook, Twitter, Instagram are diligently working to determine what is the cultural norm. By banning censoring and demonetizing conservative opinions, whilst simultaneously allowing opinions of people outright breaking their rules, these social media giants are telling people what is acceptable.
One egregious example of a blatant slap in the face of conservatives is the video of Brian Sims, a democratic representative from Pennsylvania. Sims went on a public rampage in front of a Planned Parenthood where he openly harassed an elderly woman and three underage silent protesters live streaming his offense. Offering money for their names to his viewers, constituting a Hate Crime for his condemnation of them openly praying. Yet, his account remains active. However, by Twitter’s own standards, the doxxing of people is not allowed. Taken from Twitter rules on Abusive Behavior:
“We believe in freedom of expression and open dialogue, but that means little as an underlying philosophy if voices are silenced because people are afraid to speak up. In order to ensure that people feel safe expressing diverse opinions and beliefs, we prohibit behavior that crosses the line into abuse, including behavior that harasses, intimidates, or uses fear to silence another user’s voice.”
“Context matters when evaluating for abusive behavior and determining appropriate enforcement actions. Factors we may take into consideration include, but are not limited to whether: -the behavior is targeted at an individual or group of people.” In Sims case, he targeted Christians praying peacefully. In his tirade, he screams that their praying is un-Christian.
The statement laying claim to freedom of expression may indicate, that people are free to express themselves as long as it falls in line with the thinking of the employees who oversee content. As far as diverse opinions, it is questionable whether or not holding a different belief on issues such as personal morality or political affiliation is considered to be a diversity.
Facebook said in a statement, “We’ve always banned individuals or organizations that promote or engage in violence and hate, regardless of ideology.” However, they still allow groups like Antifa, who engage in violent content and acts of aggression to remain active on their platform. In addition to their posts, they allow them to promote their hate platforms and events.
So inclusive is the Facebook ban, it includes a ban on people who appear to be white nationalists. Essentially declaring them as white separatists while allowing other groups to express their national pride. “Over the past three months, our conversations with members of civil society and academics who are experts in race relations around the world have confirmed that white nationalism and white separatism cannot be meaningfully separated from white supremacy and organized hate groups. Our own review of hate figures and organizations – as defined by our Dangerous Individuals & Organizations policy – further revealed the overlap between white nationalism and white separatism and white supremacy. Going forward, while people will still be able to demonstrate pride in their ethnic heritage, we will not tolerate praise or support for white nationalism and white separatism.”
Who and what should be censored? The First Amendment gives Americans the right to speak freely. The founding fathers declared this right so fundamental it is the First Amendment. Even the supreme court ruled that Hate Speech does NOT violate the First Amendment. “There’s no exception for hate speech under the First Amendment’s protection for freedom of expression unless the speech is direct, personal, and either truly threatening or violently provocative.”
Americans may not like hate speech or people who speak in a hateful disgusting manner, however, it is a principle by which we have continued to exist in this country peacefully since the Civil War. Remove our ability to speak freely, and you will have a powder keg about to explode. Everyone should have the ability regardless of the topic to engage without threats of violence, damage to one’s occupation, or threats of boycott. It is imperative that these freedoms be returned to social media. While the left threatens boycotts and physical violence on a public platform, compliments of extremely wealthy donors, (via the same platform that is censoring and limiting the livelihood of conservatives), members opposing this have little alternative but to suffer their wrath.
In the words of Justice Black, the Supreme Court in 1972, “The freedoms…guaranteed by the First Amendment must be accorded to the ideas we hate or sooner or later they will be denied to the ideas we cherish.” [quoting Healy v. James, 408 U.S. 169 (1972).]
Unless a platform by which conservatives can speak freely opens up while not negating or censoring opposing opinion, there is no alternative and social media giants will continue their crusade to dictate their moral turpitude. This is not just a First Amendment issue, but rather a cultural issue. Are we going to allow social media to dictate our morality?
Does censorship bother you? Let us know how you feel by writing WECU News supports free and independent journalism. If you have a tip or a treat we would love to hear from you.

Michael Brown’s Mother is Running for City Council in Ferguson

Lesley McSpadden, mother of Michael Brown is running for City Council in Ferguson Missouri. One of three candidates running in Ferguson’s 3rd Ward. If she wins, she would have oversight over the department connected with her son’s death.
Michael Brown is the young man whose death caused civil unrest in Ferguson Missouri, over the controversial statement, “Hands up, Don’t shoot!” Which later exonerated the officer Darren Wilson, due to a preponderance of the evidence that the shooting was legitimate. And that Brown had charged at officer Wilson in a menacing manner. The DNA and forensic evidence proved Wilson’s account of the incidents.
The incidents in Ferguson led to months of civil unrest as well as peaceful protests. Many people came forward to claim that Brown had his hands up and was begging Wilson not to shoot him. However, after being questioned by the FBI, those witnesses were later found to be fabricating testimony based on what the media was claiming.
In a statement made to the Associated Press, McSpadden claimed, “I wanted to go back and do something right in a place that did something so very wrong to my son, and I think that’s what my son would want as well.”
Despite being new to politics, McSpadden has been at the front of the Black Lives Matter Movement and claims that she wants the police to work harder to protect and serve.

Facebook the New Morality Police

It is becoming apparent that Facebook a social media giant has taken on the role to be the morality police of social media. In one of their posts, entitled, Standing Against Hate, the social media giant lays out their new policies regarding hate, and hate speech. Placing special emphasis on white supremacy and separatism. “Our policies have long prohibited hateful treatment of people based on characteristics such as race, ethnicity or religion — and that has always included white supremacy. We didn’t originally apply the same rationale to expressions of white nationalism and white separatism because we were thinking about broader concepts of nationalism and separatism”
Facebook makes reference to consulting academic experts and members of “civil society” who “confirmed that white nationalism and white separatism cannot be meaningfully separated from white supremacy and organized hate groups.”
Academic experts such as those experts at the Southern Poverty Law Center, who routinely declare people who have a dissenting opinion than that of their global view as a “hate group.” The new Facebook policy has made it clear that white supremacy, white nationalism, white separatism are now considered to be a hate philosophy. Furthermore, Facebook goes on to state, “while people will still be able to demonstrate pride in their ethnic heritage, we will not tolerate praise or support for white nationalism and white separatism.”
This singling out of one particular “hate group” is concerning. Facebook in it’s singling out of one specific group, has given allowances for the rise of other forms of hate organizations. Specific organizations, that promote hate in an organization with antisemitism or even anti-christian groups.
Those people who are questioning Facebook new policy are to be directed to Life After Hate to understand their new policies.
What do you think about Facebook new policy? We want to know. You can message us at Please share our article whether or not you agree or disagree.

Sharia Law has come to Twitter

Twitter, has taken to Sharia Law. Or at least their legal department is informing twitter users that they need to seek legal counsel regarding their tweet because users Tweets are in violation of Pakistan law.

One such user of Twitter, Michelle Malkin, conservative journalist, author, political commentator and business woman is under attack due to her commentary. As Michelle points out on her twitter account,” I’ve been #SiliconValleySharia -ed. Here’s the notice Twitter’s legal dept sent me last week, warning me to get legal counsel because anti-blasphemy Muslim zealots complained that my Mohammed Cartoons tweet violates Pakistan’s laws.”

Michelle Malkin Shariaed tweet

Twitter’s legal department should beg the question, as to why Twitter is following Pakistan Law. Malkin’s offending tweet featuring images of Muhammad:

Michelle Malkin offending tweet

CNN reported that, “While the Quran does not explicitly prohibit depictions of Mohammad, most contemporary Muslims worldwide abide by the ban, based largely on religious rulings by Islamic scholars.” So why the uproar with respect to the depiction of Muhammad?

Other Conservative anti-sharia advocates have received the same twitter notice this violates Pakistan Law. Among those is Author Pamela Geller, who received death threats for her “Draw Muhammad” contest. This event in Garland Texas drew the ire of two men whom, “armed with assault rifles drove up to the venue and began shooting.” Luckily no one was killed.

This Pakistan law threat is apparently common. According to the Straight’s Times, “the notices, which came about as a result of “valid requests from an authorized entity”, helped users “to take measures to protect their interests”, and the process is not unique to any one country.” Begging the question, does Pakistan now own twitter’s interests?

When AFP news agency reached out to question Twitter, a spokesperson for twitter responded with, “In our continuing effort to make our services available to people everywhere, if we receive a valid requests from an authorized entity, it may be necessary to withhold access to certain content in a particular country from time to time.” Furthermore, Pakistan has threatened to block Twitter if the company did not remove content its government found offensive.

How long until, social media giants decide to follow sharia law and prohibit any dissenting opinions on the subject of religious worship? Will Americans simply tailor their comments to the likes of that which appeases Islamic dogma? Or will they continue to hold the 1st Amendment?

We want to know your opinion. Do you believe in the first Amendment? Or should religious doctrine rule for followers of Sharia where social media is concerned?

You can post your opinions to You opinions are very important to us. Thanks for reading.


Has Big Tech Gone too Far?

Donald Trump Jr. the son of President Trump, recently wrote an op ed in real clear politics, where he laid claim that Instagram censored him over a comment he made regarding Jussie Smollett. Smollett, the actor who orchestrated a hate crime hoax according to the Chicago police department. Trump Jr. pointed out how unbelievable Smollett’s accusation was in the first place.

Trump Jr. Stated, “As Jussie Smollett’s preposterous story about being beaten in a racist, homophobic attack was falling apart, I posted about it on Facebook-owned Instagram, pointing out how unbelievable his allegation was in the first place.”

“After I let my followers know my thoughts on the Smollett hoax, I received a notification that Instagram deleted my post.”donald trump Jr. Instagram regarding smollett

Donald trump Jr. Instagram cont.

Instagram apologized for removing his post, however it begs the question. Has big tech gone too far?

Many conservative sites have been de-monetized by YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram. And several have had their platforms removed.

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.

Prager U which has been censored by YouTube, made the statement. “Conservative ideas are under attack. YouTube does not want young people to hear conservative ideas as they currently list over 80 PragerU videos– over 10 percent of our entire library–under “restricted mode” making it difficult for many young people to access our videos.”

Activist Mommy, had her Twitter account suspended after she criticized a Teen Vogue editor who approved of publishing an article that encouraged youth to have anal sex. Grace Johnson had her twitter account suspended under Twitter terms and conditions of harassment, for criticizing the editor of Teen Vogue for promoting Anal sex for teens.

Marsha Blackburn, Republican Congresswoman of Tennessee had a Twitter Ad censored because of her Pro-Life stance. Talking about de-funding Planned Parenthood.

Google, Internet behemoth has even taken part in the algorithm as they have been adjusting their searches based on progressive ideals. Making finding conservative outlets more difficult to retrieve on their search engine.

There are approximately 325.7 million Americans and with 2/3 using social media to search for news and information, it is important that they be exposed to an alternate opinion than what the social media giants have imposed. The type of censorship they have been imposing on Americans is similar to the type of censorship of communist countries. Congress has been ineffective in stopping the censorship of these social media giants.

Is it time that social media be governed under the principles of the second Amendment, or maybe an alternative media be introduced to compete with that of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram? Despite the growth and success of Gab.AI, they were temporarily suspended due to outrage over their inability to effectively censor someone who later went on a shooting rampage killing several people worshiping at a synagogue.

Is it safe to say, that the United States is being held hostage to the social media giants who are censoring conservative articles and opinion? Also, what are the effective alternatives to such said censorship? Without proper information how can anyone make an informed decision regarding their future?

Have an opinion or a tip, send us a message at

Blog at

Up ↑