• FCC Commissioner: Why Is Facebook Censoring Accurate Information About

    From John Smyth@21:1/5 to All on Mon Oct 21 13:47:45 2024
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.republicans, talk.politics.guns XPost: alt.computer.workshop

    These bozos at the FCC are just discovering this?
    So is Google BTW.

    'FCC Commissioner: Why Is Facebook Censoring Accurate Information About
    Kamala Harris?'

    <https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4272375/posts>

    <https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2024/10/21/fcc-commissioner-why-is-facebook-censoring-accurate-information-about-kamala-harris-n2646479>



    'Vice President Kamala Harris is shamelessly trying to run away from her 'Border Czar' responsibilities, often with the assistance of a compliant
    'news' media, but that wasn't the only major job with which she's been
    tasked in the Biden-Harris administration. The president also tapped
    her to help lead and oversee a number of expensive 'green' and
    infrastructure initiatives. On a costly plan to install new electric
    vehicle chargers (Harris is suddenly pretending she has nothing to do
    with EV mandates she has supported and co-sponsored), Politico described
    its 'progress' in late 2023: "Congress at the urging of the Biden administration agreed in 2021 to spend $7.5 billion to build tens of
    thousands of electric vehicle chargers across the country, aiming to
    appease anxious drivers while tackling climate change. Two years later,
    the program has yet to install a single charger." This past summer, the results were still embarrassing: "Just seven electric-vehicle charging
    stations have begun operating with funding from a $5-billion US
    government program created in 2021, marking “pathetic” progress, a Democratic senator said on Wednesday."

    That serves as a backdrop to a related matter on which Harris was
    explicitly placed in charge. FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr summarized
    the issue in a recent Wall Street Journal op/ed, explaining how a much-ballyhooed rural broadband project has utterly failed thus far, on
    Harris' watch:

    Kamala Harris lamented recently that “in America, it takes too long and
    it costs too much to build.” She’s right. But she failed to mention that those costly delays are a feature, not a bug, of her progressive
    policies. Consider Ms. Harris’s record. In 2021 she agreed to lead the administration’s $42 billion plan for expanding high-speed internet to millions of Americans. That year, she tweeted that “we can bring
    broadband to rural America today.” Today, nearly three years after
    Congress passed the infrastructure bill that created the program, not
    one home or business has been connected through it. The Biden-Harris administration recently confirmed that construction projects won’t begin until next year at the earliest, and in many cases not until 2026.

    Instead of focusing on delivering broadband to unserved areas, the administration has used the program to advance a wish list of political
    goals. It has adopted regulations that include diversity, equity and
    inclusion requirements, climate-change rules, price controls,
    preferences for union labor, and schemes that favor government-run
    networks. The administration has been handing out wins to favored
    political groups rather than delivering results. Other factors have kept
    Ms. Harris’s high-speed program in the slow lane. Testifying before a congressional oversight committee, one state government official
    described “a chaotic implementation environment” marked by “dysfunction”
    and “delays.” The administration, she said, “has provided either no guidance, guidance given too late, or guidance changing midstream.”

    Recommended

    We Know What Fani Willis' Lover Told Congress
    Mia Cathell
    This is, of course, a poor reflection on the Biden-Harris
    administration, an indictment of her leadership, and another example of
    why bloated government programs are so often wasteful and useless. It
    also begs the question of what, if anything, Harris has done well as
    Vice President. But what makes this all worse is Commissioner Carr's subsequent allegation that Facebook is censoring his accurate WSJ piece
    as 'misinformation:'


    Facebook is now censoring the fact that VP Harris has failed to connect
    even one person to the Internet despite leading the Administration’s $42 billion infrastructure plan for 1,000+ days. Facebook is labeling this
    “false information,” not because anyone has been connected—no one has—but because the government has been spending money while not
    connecting anyone. Worse? The fact checker’s only sources are
    Biden-Harris officials. I thought Zuckerberg promised Congress that it
    had stopped censoring posts at the behest of the Biden-Harris Administration...Here’s what VP Harris and Facebook don’t want you to
    know: VP Harris has been leading the Administration’s $42 billion
    program to expand Internet access to millions of Americans for 1,070
    days. Zero people have been connected. Zero shovels worth of dirt have
    even been turned.

    A social media giant is suppressing accurate information, furnished by a government official--deciding it's "false," based on the say-so of
    other, favored government officials. That is unacceptable and
    disturbing, but it can't be seen as terribly surprising at this point.
    But for those who purport to care about democracy dying in darkness, and 'misinformation,' and transparency, how can this sort of thing be
    justified or defended? Or is it an ends-justify-the-means gambit that throttles or blocks unhelpful information (even if there's a dispute
    about whether it's fully correct, or at least disputed, or lacking
    context) right before an election? As for other elements of Harris'
    record and worldview, this was revealing:



    A number of people have pointed out this juxtaposition:



    I'll leave you with some of the other interesting choices Harris and her surrogates are making entering the final stretch of this high-stakes
    campaign:'

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From pothead@21:1/5 to John Smyth on Mon Oct 21 23:49:23 2024
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.republicans, talk.politics.guns XPost: alt.computer.workshop

    On 2024-10-21, John Smyth <smythlejon2@hotmail.com> wrote:
    These bozos at the FCC are just discovering this?
    So is Google BTW.

    'FCC Commissioner: Why Is Facebook Censoring Accurate Information About Kamala Harris?'

    <https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4272375/posts>

    <https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2024/10/21/fcc-commissioner-why-is-facebook-censoring-accurate-information-about-kamala-harris-n2646479>



    'Vice President Kamala Harris is shamelessly trying to run away from her 'Border Czar' responsibilities, often with the assistance of a compliant 'news' media, but that wasn't the only major job with which she's been
    tasked in the Biden-Harris administration. The president also tapped
    her to help lead and oversee a number of expensive 'green' and
    infrastructure initiatives. On a costly plan to install new electric
    vehicle chargers (Harris is suddenly pretending she has nothing to do
    with EV mandates she has supported and co-sponsored), Politico described
    its 'progress' in late 2023: "Congress at the urging of the Biden administration agreed in 2021 to spend $7.5 billion to build tens of thousands of electric vehicle chargers across the country, aiming to
    appease anxious drivers while tackling climate change. Two years later,
    the program has yet to install a single charger." This past summer, the results were still embarrassing: "Just seven electric-vehicle charging stations have begun operating with funding from a $5-billion US
    government program created in 2021, marking “pathetic” progress, a Democratic senator said on Wednesday."

    That serves as a backdrop to a related matter on which Harris was
    explicitly placed in charge. FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr summarized
    the issue in a recent Wall Street Journal op/ed, explaining how a much-ballyhooed rural broadband project has utterly failed thus far, on Harris' watch:

    Kamala Harris lamented recently that “in America, it takes too long and
    it costs too much to build.” She’s right. But she failed to mention that those costly delays are a feature, not a bug, of her progressive
    policies. Consider Ms. Harris’s record. In 2021 she agreed to lead the administration’s $42 billion plan for expanding high-speed internet to millions of Americans. That year, she tweeted that “we can bring
    broadband to rural America today.” Today, nearly three years after
    Congress passed the infrastructure bill that created the program, not
    one home or business has been connected through it. The Biden-Harris administration recently confirmed that construction projects won’t begin until next year at the earliest, and in many cases not until 2026.

    Instead of focusing on delivering broadband to unserved areas, the administration has used the program to advance a wish list of political goals. It has adopted regulations that include diversity, equity and inclusion requirements, climate-change rules, price controls,
    preferences for union labor, and schemes that favor government-run
    networks. The administration has been handing out wins to favored
    political groups rather than delivering results. Other factors have kept
    Ms. Harris’s high-speed program in the slow lane. Testifying before a congressional oversight committee, one state government official
    described “a chaotic implementation environment” marked by “dysfunction”
    and “delays.” The administration, she said, “has provided either no guidance, guidance given too late, or guidance changing midstream.”

    Recommended

    We Know What Fani Willis' Lover Told Congress
    Mia Cathell
    This is, of course, a poor reflection on the Biden-Harris
    administration, an indictment of her leadership, and another example of
    why bloated government programs are so often wasteful and useless. It
    also begs the question of what, if anything, Harris has done well as
    Vice President. But what makes this all worse is Commissioner Carr's subsequent allegation that Facebook is censoring his accurate WSJ piece
    as 'misinformation:'


    Facebook is now censoring the fact that VP Harris has failed to connect
    even one person to the Internet despite leading the Administration’s $42 billion infrastructure plan for 1,000+ days. Facebook is labeling this “false information,” not because anyone has been connected—no one has—but because the government has been spending money while not
    connecting anyone. Worse? The fact checker’s only sources are
    Biden-Harris officials. I thought Zuckerberg promised Congress that it
    had stopped censoring posts at the behest of the Biden-Harris Administration...Here’s what VP Harris and Facebook don’t want you to know: VP Harris has been leading the Administration’s $42 billion
    program to expand Internet access to millions of Americans for 1,070
    days. Zero people have been connected. Zero shovels worth of dirt have
    even been turned.

    A social media giant is suppressing accurate information, furnished by a government official--deciding it's "false," based on the say-so of
    other, favored government officials. That is unacceptable and
    disturbing, but it can't be seen as terribly surprising at this point.
    But for those who purport to care about democracy dying in darkness, and 'misinformation,' and transparency, how can this sort of thing be
    justified or defended? Or is it an ends-justify-the-means gambit that throttles or blocks unhelpful information (even if there's a dispute
    about whether it's fully correct, or at least disputed, or lacking
    context) right before an election? As for other elements of Harris'
    record and worldview, this was revealing:



    A number of people have pointed out this juxtaposition:



    I'll leave you with some of the other interesting choices Harris and her surrogates are making entering the final stretch of this high-stakes campaign:'

    Facebook as a public company is entitled to enact processes that the shareholders
    agree upon.
    If they want to censor, that's up to them.

    However they should no longer be protected by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.


    --
    pothead

    See Kamala Harris best interview ever. https://www.foxnews.com/video/6363352689112
    She really knocks this one out of the park.
    Don't you agree?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)