Frances Haugen, the whistleblower who wasn’t.
There is, to a certain extent, issues concerning the power that Big Tech holds over American politics as well as addiction. America is certainly and heavily divided to an extent where ‘Big Tents’ are a must in an election for government has certain eroded states’ rights.
Whether the fact that Facebook, YouTube, Google and other social media platform continues with its manipulation of algorithms has been answered. One must be a large fool to assume that, given Silicon Valley’s ties with Democrat officials, be it staffs of Nancy Pelosi or supporters of the Sandinistas like that of Bernie in order to deny it. If Democrats want it their way, Silicon Valley must obey without hesitance.
Lately, however, Democrats have been anxious and angry towards Facebook, as described ‘whistleblower’ Frances Haugen, who held the position of ‘manager of civic misinformation’ stated that Facebook was aware of the negative impact it had on people.
One could certainly argue that Facebook and places such as Instagram (owned by Facebook) or TikTok have featured questionable content regarding sexuality or that of addiction. But Ms. Haugen’s concern isn’t focused mainly on the effects of addiction, but rather ‘misinformation’, especially in the wake of the January 6th riot. She then went on to argue that the position that Facebook allegedly took was ‘a betrayal of democracy to me’.
Of course, misinformation is harmful regardless of whether one talks about vaccines, herd immunity or gun control, practically speaking, however, there’s no way to police misinformation, especially with Facebook and other social media’s reputation of allowing leftist misinformation, smear campaigns, allowing Chinese Communists propagandists a platform to spread misinformation and of course, with leftist Politico’s recent admission that Hunter Biden’s email was authentic, muzzling of the New York Post’s initial report on his emails.
Ms. Haugen’s stance couldn’t be clearer, in fact, in line with her former boss’s position of a need for more regulation, in other words, direct control shall be handed over to the same bureaucracy that unequivocally hates rightists. Mr. Zuckerberg, like Ms. Haugen, stated during 2019 that he didn’t want private companies to dictate decisions on how to ‘balance social equities without any more democratic process’.
We aren’t concerned about any nonsense in regards to ‘democracy’ or harmful material. The point is: Facebook and the supposed whistleblower have one precise and clear agenda: that is handing their power into the hands of the federal government. Of course, during the 60 Minutes interview Ms. Haugen stated clearly that she wanted more regulations to prevent ‘hateful, polarizing content’. Sen. Dick Blumenthal (D-Conn.) also stood firm in line, wanting ‘stronger oversight, effective protection for children, and tools for parents…’
All of this is anything but genuine care for misinformation or harm caused by social media for the fact that it’s merely a theater to disguise the current agenda within the Beltway. While Republicans stood watching and concerned about the effects of an Instagram for those younger than 13, and bipartisan support for regulations are all a pretext to something far sinister. And so-called representatives for conservatives in the Beltway fell for it.
What Democrats and their friends at Facebook want is paternalistic control. Constant moaning about how democracy (or the Leninist principle of ‘democratic centralization’) is being harmed essentially means ‘why aren’t Californians being given a say over a Texan’s life’, literally. It is directly in line with progressive principles of centralization, for the well-read yet oblivious conservative, yes Section 230 is in trouble. Section 230, isn’t what center-right comedian Steven Crowder claimed during an interview with John Stossel as merely acting as legal protection for Big Tech, applies to all sites, whether it’s The American Conservative, New York Times, Facebook or Rumble. It doesn’t define what a ‘publisher’ or ‘platform’ is, but gives them the same protection.
Of course, America has been on a steady path towards centralization, far from the original constitution (i.e. the Articles of Confederation) or when the founders drafted the current constitution (i.e. the Constitution of 1787). Conservatives have lost touch with their roots and doesn’t have a coherent ideology and thus, long term strategy. The only thing about conservatives’ strategy is merely reaction, and thus, unaware of the intentions and plans the Democrats have in mind. Of course, conservatives are right on many issues, but Big Tech is one that may cost the conservative movement its freedom.
Fact is: this also coincides with AG Garland’s disturbing letter stating parents and even children who rebel against the teaching of pseudointellectual and racist Critical Race Theory or Sensitivity Training as terrorists. What conservatives should perceive is that this as a direct, yet subtle assault on few remaining fragments of liberty.
To readers: I would like to apologize for my extremely lengthy break due to several health scares regarding my now-recovered back as well as dealing with Internet providers so I can get back on track. I would also make something clear that, I’m now an anarcho-capitalist.