The field of journalism is not easy. They are poorly paid and, most of the time, have to be out of their comfort zone. Journalists are often rejected and always pressured by deadlines that they may barely meet. On top of that, they are hated, and that hatred is escalating.
By James Sweet III | United States
In an update from March of 2018, Google announced to the world that they would ban cryptocurrency advertisements on their platforms, effective June. With the 1st of June being in the past, Google has begun to enforce their ban on advertisements from “Cryptocurrencies and related content (including but not limited to initial coin offerings, cryptocurrency exchanges, cryptocurrency wallets, and cryptocurrency trading advice)”.
Google isn’t the only company to ban cryptocurrency ads, with Facebook doing so earlier in the year. Facebook had intentions to develop new technology for the company based off of the blockchain, leading many to wonder if Google is attempting to do the same and their advertisement ban is just a way to knock out the competition. A spokesperson for Google stated, “Like many new technologies, we have individuals in various teams exploring the potential use of blockchain, but it’s too early for us to speculate about any possible uses or plans”.
There is seem proper reasoning behind the advertisement ban by these tech-giants, as research shows that 80% of ICO’s are fraudulent. Business Insider has also reported that more “pump and dump” scams have appeared in the crypto-currency community.
While talking to The Independent, Phillip Nunn, CEO of Manchester-based investment firm Blackmore Group, said, “I understand that Facebook and Google are under a lot of pressure to regulate what their users are reading, but they are still advertising gambling websites and other unethical practices”.
I suspect the ban has been implemented to fit in with potential plans to introduce their own cryptocurrency to the market in the near future and therefore removing other crypto adverts allows them to do it on their own terms.
What do you think? Is Google trying to protect their users from fraudulent ICO’s that are stealing their money, or are they planning for something bigger in the future?
By Mason Mohon | @mohonofficial
United Kingdom financial advisor Martin Lewis is suing Facebook for defamation after cryptocurrency ads using his name and face continued to pop up on the site.
By Mason Mohon | @mohonofficial
On Aprill 11, Mark Zuckerberg will be questioned by the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Lucky for Mark, this is the house panel that has received the most contributions from Facebook.
The committee has received over $380,000 from Facebook since 2007.
The Senate Commerce and Science Committee also announced that it would be questioning the social media CEO. Its members have received $235,000 in Facebook contributions.
Democrats have received 65% of the donations, while Republicans have only received 33% of the total $7 million payouts.
Exact statistics can be found here.
Facebook has come under fire lately for its involvement with Cambridge Analytica, an organization that played a role in the Brexit referendum and 2016 United States election.
Seeing as that Mark Zuckerberg fills the pockets of our lawmakers, it is unlikely that they will make him or his organization play by the same rules of the game as anyone else.
This is what happens when big brother gets in bed with big government.
By Colin Louis | United States
Over the last couple of weeks, new revelations have come forward about Facebook’s use of user data. This, along with bannings on various social media platforms, has raised several questions about social media censorship.
Many supporters of censorship claim that it will prevent giving the Alt-Right a platform on social media. They may sound good in theory, but they don’t work in practice. Extremists still spread extremism online.
There are two ways we can take on this problem of Alt-Right online extremism; we can debate or we can ban. Censorship is not the way to go.
Let’s see who’s not being censored.
Richard Spencer, a White Supremacist and founder of the Alt-Right still has a Twitter and Instagram account.
Matthew Heimbach, a Neo-Nazi and leader of the Traditionalist Workers Party still has a YouTube account that he posts his hateful videos.
Paul Nehlen, a White Nationalist and candidate for Wisconsin’s first congressional district still has an Instagram account.
AltRight.com, the literal website for the Alt-Right is fully functional.
BloodandSoil.org, the website for the white nationalist group ‘Patriot Front’ is actively recruiting members on their website. (“Blood and Soil” was a nazi chant yelled at Charlottesville.)
Nsm88.org, the official website for the National Socialist Movement, the new American Nazi Party is still fully functional. The “88” in the website name is code for “hail Hitler,” (The 8th letter of the alphabet is H. HH is short for “hail Hitler.”)
The point is that censorship by Google, Twitter, and YouTube doesn’t work against the Alt-Right. While it’s unfortunate, regardless of if we shut them up or not hate will continue to spread and we should take a better approach to it. The Alt-Right is an ideology of hate that can only be combated with free speech.
The only solution is to debate them and prove their ideology wrong (just as one would with any other dangerous ideology).
If you want to show the world that Nazism and White Supremacy aren’t the way to go, beat them in debate and prove to the internet they are wrong. Use facts and logic as your sword, not censorship.
Even if you take away their platform racists are still going to be racist.
If you beat them on their platform you will see what little influence they have. Take Richard Spencer’s speech in Florida: almost nobody would have showed up if the Governor hadn’t declared a state of emergency. By taking their platform away they can tell people “they want to censor us because we tell the truth!”
Censoring them makes it look like they are winning. It makes the other side look scared of their arguments. It is the weak thing to do.
So, don’t use censorship to attack the Alt-Right. The Alt-Right is a force of hate and ignorance, but we need to use logic to prove them wrong. Removing a couple of twitter pages won’t do anything, we need to focus our force on destroying their core philosophy.