Advertisements

Facebook Is Deliberately Interfering In Missouri’s Senate Election

The deliberate hypocrisy of the social media organization is clear.

Advertisements

By Mason Mohon | @mohonofficial

Zuckerberg hates the Russians that hijacked his platform and turned the tide of American history. The mainstream narrative that Russians meddled in the 2016 election is always changing, but the Facebook gang has gone with the story that they used Facebook’s platform to spread election propaganda.

Ladies and gentlemen, these are the images that redefined what it means to be an American.

If top-text bottom-text memes and memes using impact font are what determined Clinton’s loss we were doomed from the start anyway. The issue is, Facebook has begun to tout itself as the new upholder of democracy, thinking that banning pages that share bad memes bought by Russians make it the new safeguard of the American dream. Twitter took similar action recently, too, hoping to hold back the horde of Russian trolls.

This ever-changing narrative of how the Russians worked to get Donald Trump elected as the 45th POTUS is somewhat laughable, but that is not the point. The point is the blatant hypocrisy coming from the organization that is clearly targeting specific candidates in state-level elections.

Former Libertarian Presidential candidate and current Missourian Senatorial candidate Austin Petersen was recently banned from Facebook for the second time during his campaign for promoting his AR-15 giveaway.

The giveaway has the intention of promoting Second Amendment and making a point that gun rights are crucial to the American public. During the fall of 2017, Petersen received a 30-day ban for the same reasons. He managed to clean it up by making clear that he was not using the platform as a means of selling the firearm, but rather just a giveaway.

But Facebook has gone ahead and banned him again.

As it turns out, Facebook’s COO Sheryl Sandberg is good friends with Austin’s opponent, Claire McCaskill. Repeatedly has Sandberg donated to McCaskill’s campaigns, both in 2012 and 2018. The two have heavily intertwining personal and professional relationships. Sandberg sees her as a strong female role model for young women, promoting her in book events and Silicon Valley dinners.

There is a very clear connection here. Austin Petersen is using Facebook as a campaign platform, yet a chief member of Facebook is an outspoken ally of Peterson’s prime opponent. Seeing as that Facebook does not often ban gun giveaway pages or programs on the site, this is clearly a targeted instance.

Facebook is deliberately working to interfere in the election. As a private organization, they are not at any ethical fault for their actions, but as private consumers, it is our duty to take action when they act in an unsavory manner. Facebook wants Austin Petersen to lose his election and is taking clear steps to make that happen.

Facebook, stop parading around as democracies sacred guardian if you are going to make your interference in the system so clear.


Featured image source.

Advertisements
  1. I think the action of interfering in the election and the result of Trump winning should be separated. First because we will never know the full impact that Russia had on the elections. I doubt Putin even knows. And second because even if they did influence it, it’s not like Trump had no support. 63 Million americans voted for him. There’s no way that is all made up. Clearly there are a lot of red-hat wearers.

    I think a lot of the reason Trump supporters get defensive on the Russia stuff is because they think it is an attempt to de-legitimize the election. The Democrats need to collectively state that the election was legal, and that they aren’t trying to ‘undo’ the election. Trump was elected fair and square. After all, he wasn’t elected by those millions of people. He was elected by the electoral college. And unless there is evidence that a member of the EC is really a russian spy (or dozens of them), it doesn’t matter.

    That said, I think everyone of all political leanings should want secure, accurate elections. Our entire system of governance runs on the legitimacy of our election system. Whats strange is I see both sides fighting for this, but from different angles.

    people on the Right want to use IDs to vote to help curb election fraud. People on the Left want paper ballots and offline voting machines to curb election fraud. But both seem to be against the other’s suggestions.

    I think we need a bipartisan committee to look at all of these aspects of our election systems and come up with some good systems to make sure everyone who has the right to vote, can vote. And anyone who doesn’t have the right to vote is prevented from affecting the election.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: