A former Obama administration official tasked with leading governmental media agencies in Joe Biden’s shadow transition has called for criminalizing what he defines as “hate speech,” calling for “guardrails” against legally protected free speech he finds inconvenient.
Richard Stengel made a comprehensive argument in favor of government-enforced censorship in a 2019 Washington Post op-ed, citing European-style restrictions on speech.
“Since World War II, many nations have passed laws to curb the incitement of racial and religious hatred. These laws started out as protections against the kinds of anti-Semitic bigotry that gave rise to the Holocaust. We call them hate speech laws, but there’s no agreed-upon definition of what hate speech actually is. In general, hate speech is speech that attacks and insults people on the basis of race, religion, ethnic origin and sexual orientation.”
“I think it’s time to consider these statutes.“
Stengel appears on MSNBC and is on the staff of the globalist Atlantic Council. He has been tasked as the “Team Lead” for the US Agency for Global Media, an oversight agency for government-controlled news entities such as Voice for America and Radio Liberty. The outcome of the presidential election is still unclear, with President Trump filing litigation alleging voter fraud and recounts pending.
“Yes, the First Amendment protects the “thought that we hate,” but it should not protect hateful speech that can cause violence by one group against another. In an age when everyone has a megaphone, that seems like a design flaw,” argued Stengel in a Washington Post op-ed.
In an ironic twist, Stengel worked for the National Constitution Center from 2004 to 2006. He must not have paid much attention to the First Amendment of the organization’s namesake when he worked there.
In another irony, Stengel advertises that he’s appearing at a “Journalism Under Fire” conference in New Mexico on Saturday on his personal website. Potentially, he’ll have the opportunity to hear from actual journalists distinct from MSNBC’s “Corporate/Government” media model who value the right of free expression.
YOUR NEW MASTER: Twitter’s Head of Conversational Safety, a “Young, Queer Asian-American Businesswoman,” is “Rethinking” the Concept of User Safety
Do you trust someone like her to make Twitter “a safer place”?
The media company Protocol, a sister site of Politico, recently published an article about Twitter’s new “head of product for conversational safety,” Christine Su. It claims that Su, a “young, queer Asian-American businesswoman,” is revolutionizing what “user safety” on social media means.
Twitter hired Su around six months ago to be in charge of “what might be the most difficult task on Twitter,” despite having no apparent experience in politics, programming, and media relations. But Twitter seems to like her for her “creative” and “somewhat radical new ideas” about user safety.
“As a queer woman of color who is an Asian American in tech in rural America, that experience is a very intersectional one. I’ve had plenty of experiences moving through spaces where I wanted more safety,” Su said.
Protocol writes that Su’s vision incorporates “transformative and procedural justice.” Transformative justice ostensibly refers to a non-retributive form of repairing harm done to someone and preventing it from happening again; procedural justice to enacting a set of rules that “make harm rarer in the first place.”
This all sounds nice and dandy—but beware. So-called transformative and procedural justice will not benefit you, but will crush you. Anything that’s perceived as “harmful” against “women and people from marginalized groups” can and will be used to censor you. Christine Su may reassuringly claim that “the point is not to make the entire world a safe space,” but she’s open about the fact that she will help give the Coalition of the Fringes more control over what people are allowed to do and say on Twitter.
Examples from the article:
- Creating an audio hangout feature called “Spaces,” which will allow users to determine who is allowed to participate, as well as who can speak and when. (Note that it’s being tested on “women and marginalized groups of people” first.)
- Potentially doubling down on functions that “encourage people to read content before reposting it.” (Which is exclusively done to censor or limit the reach of conservative and other right-wing content.)
- Building tools that “create private pathways for apologies, forgiveness and deescalation.” (The finer details are still a work in progress according to Su.)
- Defining what a “meaningful conversation” is. (Would people like Su think that anything right-wingers say or believe belongs in a “meaningful conversation”? Let’s just say I wouldn’t bet money on it…)
You know full well that a company like Facebook would shortly follow suit. After all, it’s not just Twitter that Su is “revolutionizing,” but the concept of social media itself. Figure out where all this is heading.
Now is as good a time as ever to plug our Parler:
Follow Big League Politics on Parler: @BigLeaguePol
Follow Evan James on Parler: @CatholicEJames
Culture3 days ago
March Study Points to Pervasive Mental Illness Among White American Liberals
States3 days ago
COVER-UP: Whitmer Admin Says ‘Records Do Not Exist’ Pertaining to $25 Million Dominion Contract Set Up by Democrat Official
States3 days ago
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel Threatens Election Fraud Whistleblowers with Prosecution
Culture3 days ago
BASED: University Professor Placed on Leave After Exposing ‘Satanic, Globalist Elite’ in Explosive Letter
Big League Wellness2 days ago
Doctors Urge the CDC to Make the Public Aware of Painful Side Effects of Experimental COVID-19 Vaccines
Opinion2 days ago
President Trump Must Consider Annihilating the GOP to Reverse Electoral Impropriety
Congress3 days ago
Democrat Black Farmers Bill Would Give Away $8 Billion of Land Yearly in Reparations Program
Politics2 days ago
BREAKING: Pennsylvania Judge BLOCKS Certification of State’s Election Results