Home 2020 Free Speech Social Media Platform Parler Declares To Show All Political Ads...

Free Speech Social Media Platform Parler Declares To Show All Political Ads ‘Without Censorship of Editorialization’

49
0
free-speech-social-media-platform-parler-declares-to-show-all-political-ads-‘without-censorship-of-editorialization’

Tuesday, the alt-tech social media platform Parler published a post explaining that regardless of political party, all political ads would remain uncensored on the site.

“In keeping with its mission to be a true Public Square, not an agenda driven publisher, Parler will curate and circulate any ads from legitimate campaigns and allow voters to evaluate the candidates for themselves,” the post reads.

“Parler is resolute in our commitment to free speech. Campaigns will be able to present their material free from censorship, and our community will watch, listen, debate, challenge, refute or validate as they see fit without authoritarian meddling,” said Parler Strategic Investor Jeffrey Wernick.

“Free and open debate is the only way that voters can sort through difficult issues and make their own decisions. Tech Tyrants like Facebook and Twitter are biased publishers who push their own agenda through censorship and editorialization,” Wernick said.

Recently, Twitter has doubled down on the censorship of Conservatives, often flagging certain tweets as “misleading” and offering up conflicting information from third-party “fact-checkers” who are anything but politically neutral. These “fact-checkers” are actually contracted out by the social media company to present the story they want you to hear, while censoring and often times deleting contradicting posts that challenge what they claim is the “official narrative.”

Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley questioned Twitter’s policies after the platform slapped warning labels on a pair of President Trump’s tweets in March where he warned of the dangers of using mail-in ballots, and deleted tweets that the president retweeted belonging to Conservative accounts.

“Hold on – ⁦@Twitter⁩ will take down posts by ⁦@realDonaldTrump⁩ but WON’T take down the #China Communist propaganda lies blaming US soldiers for starting #covid19#coronavirus?,” Hawley asked.

President Trump accused Twitter of election interference in the 2020 presidential election after a warning was placed on two of his early morning tweets by the social media platform where Trump spoke of the dangers associated with using mail-in ballots.

“.@Twitter is now interfering in the 2020 Presidential Election. They are saying my statement on Mail-In Ballots, which will lead to massive corruption and fraud, is incorrect, based on fact-checking by Fake News CNN and the Amazon Washington Post….”

The post continued, “….Twitter is completely stifling FREE SPEECH, and I, as President, will not allow it to happen!”

Trump 2020 Campaign Manager Brad Parscale issued the following statement on Twitter’s latest policy:

“We always knew that Silicon Valley would pull out all the stops to obstruct and interfere with President Trump getting his message through to voters. Partnering with the biased fake news media ‘fact checkers’ is only a smoke screen Twitter is using to try to lend their obvious political tactics some false credibility. There are many reasons the Trump campaign pulled all our advertising from Twitter months ago, and their clear political bias is one of them.”

Just a few weeks later, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey claimed responsibility for editorializing the president’s tweets. “Fact check: there is someone ultimately accountable for our actions as a company, and that’s me. Please leave our employees out of this. We’ll continue to point out incorrect or disputed information about elections globally. And we will admit to and own any mistakes we make,” Dorsey tweeted.

“This does not make us an “arbiter of truth.” Our intention is to connect the dots of conflicting statements and show the information in dispute so people can judge for themselves. More transparency from us is critical so folks can clearly see the why behind our actions,” Dorsey added in a subsequent tweet.

Dorsey also posted a link to Twitter’s “Civic integrity policy” and updated the warning label on Trump’s tweet to clarify why it was labeled misleading. Clicking on the warning label on the president’s tweet, and you

Two days later, Twitter once again censored one of President Trump’s tweets claiming that it violated “Twitter Rules about glorifying violence.”

Twitter added that though the words President Trump used in the tweet (“THUGS”, and “when the looting starts, the shooting starts”) violated a newly placed rule, they determined it would be “in the public’s interest for the Tweet to remain accessible.”

That’s not what happened though. Unless you went directly to Trump’s timeline, the tweet mentioning the military helping Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz regain control while looters and rioters continued to destroy Minneapolis and surrounding cities, the post itself would not show up as a subsequent tweet in the president’s thread, but would remain hidden, with only the alert remaining visible as the second tweet in the thread.

In addition, Twitter users had no way to interact with the tweet. Not only could users not see the president’s tweet, but the tweet could not be liked, retweeted, and users were not able to reply to the tweet in question.

 “Why can’t you Reply to this? We try to prevent a Tweet like this that otherwise breaks the Twitter Rules from reaching more people, so we have disabled most of the ways to engage with it. If you want to talk about it, you can still Retweet with comment,” a prompt read when trying to reply to the now partially hidden tweet.

When The White House posted the exact same tweet from President Trump, Twitter also labeled it as “glorifying violence”. Silencing President Trump and communications directly from The White House during a time of crisis IS A NATIONAL SECURITY THREAT.

After realizing Twitter’s labeling of the president’s tweet, the official Twitter account for The White House called Twitter out in a post that read: “The President did not glorify violence. He clearly condemned it. @Jack and Twitter’s biased, bad-faith “fact-checkers” have made it clear: Twitter is a publisher, not a platform.”

Laura Loomer warned of this level of censorship when she confronted Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey in a Congressional Hearing in 2018. While Dorsey was testifying before the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Loomer stood up and called Dorsey a liar for stating there was no bias when deciding who would get booted from the platform.

“Please help us Mr. President before it is too late because Jack Dorsey is trying to influence the election – to sway the election so the Democrats can steal the election. That is why he is censoring and shadowbanning conservatives. You are a liar.” [speaking to Jack Dorsey]

The statement released by Parler on Tuesday also mentioned the censorship seen on social media platforms as it pertains to truthfully informing the public of the dangers mail-in ballots has presented in the past:

One of the emerging contentious issues surrounding the 2020 election is the push by many states to dramatically expand Vote by Mail (VBM) programs. Experts have examined whether VBM leads to increased risk of voter fraud with mixed conclusions. However, a recent study by the Election Lab of Massachusetts Institute of Technology in conjunction with the University of Michigan concluded that VBM did increase the likelihood of fraudulent voting, particularly in jurisdictions where the program was new or rushed through without proper due diligence.

Twitter recently labeled a tweet by President Trump that said VBM would lead to voter fraud “misleading information.” Twitter was editorializing and downplaying the President’s concerns. Twitter has made clear in public statements they plan to do more of the same and will routinely insert their corporate editorial content to censor the original message of America’s political campaigns to influence our elections.”

In closing, Parler’s statement stressed the alternative social media company’s pledge to keep the platform free of censorship.

“The American Republic depends on the principle of one person, one vote, and that The People trust the outcome of our elections are fair, even when they do not like the result,” Wernick said. “Parler will do what the Technofascists try to stifle: allow Free People to debate and make up their own minds.

“Parler was founded in 2018 and has over 1 million users. The platform is committed to free speech, does not mine or sell user data, and does not censor content based on politics or ideology. Parler continues to stand with the People and against Technofascism.”

In addition to Parler’s competitors attempting to control information, and censor political advertisements, Twitter has gone one step beyond that by denying legitimate political candidates running for office access to the platform. This action directly goes against Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act which states, “The Internet and other interactive computer services offer a forum for a true diversity of political discourse, unique opportunities for cultural development, and myriad avenues for intellectual activity.”

Laura Loomer, who is running for Congress in Florida’s 21st District has been denied access to Twitter. The social media platform refuses to allow the candidate access to the same platform as her incumbent, Lois Frankel.

Loomer told The National Pulse in May, “Tech censorship is not unique to me. Everyday, there are increasing reports of conservatives being silenced and banned on social media for expressing peaceful political speech. These same social media companies have gone as far as even censoring President Trump himself, deleting several of his tweets and even labeling some of his factual tweets about Joe Biden as misinformation.

“Big tech is not only interfering in an election by denying my campaign access to social media, but they are proving to be one of the biggest threats to election integrity in all races  this election year. With the coronavirus pandemic, candidates have had to result to virtual campaigning. How is one supposed to virtual campaign while completely deplatformed? It’s time for big tech censorship to be taken seriously by our elected officials and the media. The results of all elections in 2020 depends on it.”

Parler also recently announced their drafting of their own Deceleration of Independence and Bill of Rights:

image

Here is a short excerpt from Parler’s Deceleration of Internet Independence that touches on Twitter’s using the people that helped to make them what they have built themselves up to be today, then turning and imposing heavy handed and biased censorship of those same users:

“Twitter once pledged to be a Public Square, where all peaceful voices were promised respect and equal right to be heard. With that promise in hand, The People propelled Twitter to position of great prominence. 

But absolute power corrupts absolutely. And Twitter has proven no different.

Twitter long ceased to be a public square. They are now merely a publisher. And a bad, biased publisher at that. They have become a Tech Tyrant, stepping on our Freedoms to push their agenda driven narrative.

The People spoke up. We spoke up and asked Twitter to keep their word. But the Tyrant has rebuked us and refused to listen.”

In Parler’s Tech Bill of Rights, their pledge to the American people to uphold a free, secure, and open social media platform is laid out in 7 declarations:

You can learn more about the Twexit movement, lead by Laura Loomer that encourages Twitter users to migrate to the free speech social media platform Parler here.


Web Hosting

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here