Connect with us

Tech

Ben Shapiro Publishes Pro-Facebook Propaganda After Dinner Meeting with Mark Zuckerberg

Has Shapiro been bought off?

Published

on

Earlier this week, it was revealed publicly that Ben Shapiro was among the many conservative influencers who had been dining privately with Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg at his home.

Zuckerberg talked to Shapiro in the hopes to form an alliance with the neoconservative commentator, and it appears that the Big Tech overlord was successful in courting Shapiro into his sphere of influence.

A glowing article was published on Shapiro’s Daily Wire on Thursday that painted Zuckerberg as a hero for free speech fighting back against restrictive content curation policies preferred by Democrats:

Trending: Dr. Anthony Fauci Plotted ‘Global Vaccine Action Plan’ with Bill Gates Before Pushing COVID Panic and Doubts About Hydroxychloroquine Treatments

Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg gave a defiant speech on Thursday in which he highlighted the importance of free speech in response to critics’ demands for heightened content auditing amid the 2020 presidential election cycle.

take our poll - story continues below

Are Democrats and the Fake News Media rooting for the Wuhan coronavirus to destroy the economy to remove Trump?

  • Are Democrats and the Fake News Media rooting for the Wuhan coronavirus to destroy the economy to remove Trump? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

“I’ve focused on building services to do two things: give people voice and bring people together,” Zuckerberg said while addressing a crowd at Georgetown University. “These two simple ideas — voice and inclusion — go hand in hand.”

“We’ve seen this throughout history, even if it doesn’t feel that way today. More people being able to share their perspectives has always been necessary to build a more inclusive society,” he continued. “And our mutual commitment to each other — that we hold each others’ right to express our views and be heard above our own desire to always get the outcomes we want — is how we make progress together.” …

He further expressed his pride in representing a company which values the American tradition of free expression, but noted that free speech is also not absolute, especially when that freedom infringes on another individual’s rights. He also examined some of the difficulties in determining what should constitute acceptable speech on the social media platform.

“The future depends on all of us. Whether you like Facebook or not, we need to recognize what is at stake and come together to stand for free expression at this critical moment,” Zuckerberg said. “I believe in giving people a voice because, at the end of the day, I believe in people.”

“And as long as enough of us keep fighting for this, I believe that more people’s voices will eventually help us work through these issues together and write a new chapter in our history — where from all of our individual voices and perspectives, we can bring the world closer together,” he added.

While Shapiro’s site covers Zuckerberg’s lip service in an obsequious manner, the corporation’s recent history shows an extreme hostility toward freedom of expression, particularly from conservative points of view.

Facebook’s lawyers have recently admitted in the court of law that the corporation is a publisher that maintains the right to arbitrarily censor content for any reason they see fit.

Zuckerberg’s social media platform has also shown extreme hostility against Christian speech in recent months, indicating their opposition to the most basic of American values.

With the many Big Brother offenses that Facebook has already brazenly committed, no conservative collaborator with them can be trusted – particularly Shapiro, who already has a long-record of opposing President Trump’s “America First” agenda.

Bypass Tech Censorship!

Facebook, Twitter and Google are actively restricting conservative content through biased algorithms. Silicon Valley doesn't want you to read our articles. Bypass the censorship, sign up for our newsletter now!

Bypass Tech Censorship!

Facebook, Twitter and Google are actively restricting conservative content through biased algorithms. Silicon Valley doesn't want you to read our articles. Bypass the censorship, sign up for our newsletter now!

Have a hot tip for Big League Politics?

Got a hot news tip for us? Photos or video of a breaking story? Send your tips, photos and videos to tips@bigleaguepolitics.com. All hot tips are immediately forwarded to BLP Staff.

Have something to say? Send your own guest column or original reporting to submissions@bigleaguepolitics.com.

Tech

Banished Journalist Laura Loomer’s $1.5 Billion Lawsuit Against Tech Giants Will Be Heard in Court

Loomer will have her day in court.

Published

on

Banished journalist and Florida U.S. House candidate Laura Loomer’s lawsuit against Big Tech will be heard in the court of law following an order in the D.C. Circuit on Thursday.

Loomer is accusing tech giants such as Google, Apple, Facebook and Twitter of conspiring to suppress conservative voices on their platforms. The lawsuit is challenging these monolithic corporations for allegedly violating antitrust law as well as the 1st Amendment of the Constitution.

Her lawsuit had been previously tossed out by U.S. District Judge Trever N. McFadden, a Trump appointee to the bench, who stated that “while selective censorship of the kind alleged by the plaintiffs may be antithetical to the American tradition of freedom of speech, it is not actionable under the First Amendment unless perpetrated by a state actor.” However, Loomer was able to use a recent court ruling to resurrect her lawsuit despite the initial setback.

Loomer’s legal team, led by the right-wing political interest group Freedom Watch, used the precedent of Packingham v. North Carolina, a ruling which determined that it was unconstitutional to ban sex offenders from social media. The case essentially set the precedent that social media is a 1st Amendment right.

take our poll - story continues below

Are Democrats and the Fake News Media rooting for the Wuhan coronavirus to destroy the economy to remove Trump?

  • Are Democrats and the Fake News Media rooting for the Wuhan coronavirus to destroy the economy to remove Trump? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

“Many of the principles set forth by the Supreme Court in Packingham lead to what appellants believe is the natural progression of the law to hold that social media companies are liable for First Amendment violations, given the progression of technology and its infiltration into the daily lives of nearly every single person,” Loomer’s team said in their final brief presented to the court.

Loomer points to Twitter banning her from the platform at the end of 2018 after she said that Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) adheres to a religion in which “women are abused” and “forced to wear the hijab.” She was similarly banned from Instagram for her assertion that Islam is “a cancer on humanity,” and Facebook, which owns Instagram, quickly followed suit and banned her even though the offending post was not made on that platform.

Loomer still cannot get her accounts restored despite the fact that she is running for the U.S. House in Florida’s 21st Congressional District, which could be considered a form of electoral interference.

Through her legal fight against the tech giants, Loomer is forcing them to reveal that they are no longer neutral platforms:

The tech behemoth Facebook has admitted that it is a publisher while defending its arbitrary censorship of banished journalist Laura Loomer, according to court documents.

Facebook banned Loomer’s account from their platform during a purge of popular conservative voices that happened in May. Others targeted by the purge included Milo Yiannopoulos, Alex Jones and Paul Joseph Watson. Loomer is striking back with a lawsuit that is unearthing some interesting revelations about the social media monolith.

“Under well-established law, neither Facebook nor any other publisher can be liable for failing to publish someone else’s message,” Facebook’s attorneys wrote.

Facebook actually has the audacity to claim that their 1st Amendment rights are being violated by Loomer’s lawsuit, in a total contorting of reality. They have filed a motion to dismiss the case.

“She claims Facebook labeled her as a ‘dangerous’ person who promotes hate – yet, the First Amendment has long protected such statements because they are opinions that are not capable of being proven true or false,” Facebook’s attorneys claim in their dismissal motion.

Right now, Facebook is protected under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act from being held liable for the content published on their platform. This special exemption worked fine when the social network engaged in relative neutrality, but those days are no more as Big Tech is at war with conservative and pro-Trump voices.

Loomer hopes to have her ability to communicate fully restored and to make Big Tech pay for infringing on her basic rights.

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


Trending