Connect with us

Tech

LOOMERED: Facebook Admits They Are a Publisher in New Explosive Court Documents

A lawsuit filed by banished journalist Laura Loomer has forced Facebook to admit they are a publisher.

Published

on

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.

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • 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.

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.

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) has introduced legislation to reform Section 230 and make the special immunity privileges contingent on Facebook and other tech providers remaining non-biased in how they curate content on their platforms:

As it states right now, Section 230 states that “no provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.”

Howley’s bill, the Ending Support for Internet Censorship Act, would remove that exemption for Big Tech firms if they act like publishers instead of neutral platforms. Corporations would have to comply with external audits proving their algorithms and content moderation are not biased.

“With Section 230, tech companies get a sweetheart deal that no other industry enjoys: complete exemption from traditional publisher liability in exchange for providing a forum free of political censorship,” Hawley said in a statement. “Unfortunately, and unsurprisingly, big tech has failed to hold up its end of the bargain.”

“There’s a growing list of evidence that shows big tech companies making editorial decisions to censor viewpoints they disagree with,” Hawley added. “Even worse, the entire process is shrouded in secrecy because these companies refuse to make their protocols public. This legislation simply states that if the tech giants want to keep their government-granted immunity, they must bring transparency and accountability to their editorial processes and prove that they don’t discriminate.”

Facebook is being increasingly forced to admit damaging information about its business model due to various lawsuits filed against the embattled corporation.

“There is no invasion of privacy at all, because there is no privacy,” Facebook attorney Orin Snyder admitted in court back in June, while describing the social network as a “digital town square” of sorts.

Facebook is providing ammunition for its critics to build a case to change the regulations so they can no longer inflict the Orwellian nightmare upon conservatives.

Tech

Google Engineer Admits to Company’s Political Censorship, Election Interference in New Project Veritas Sting #ExposeGoogle

Busted.

Published

on

A Google engineer admits that the tech monopoly is favoring Democrats and seeking to harm President Donald Trump’s electoral prospects in a new sting video released by Project Veritas on Monday.

Ritesh Lakhar, a Technical Program Manager for the California search engine company, admits that Google is seeking to “play God” by controlling the free flow of political information through its platforms.

He openly admits that Google is clamping down on conservative content that is amenable to the electoral prospects of Donald Trump, while seeking to promote Joe Biden. It’s no mere coincidence that the first search results for ‘Donald Trump’ come back with negative results, according to Lakhar.

If Trump says something… Misinformation, you’re going to delete that because it’s illegal under whatever pretext. And if a Democratic leader says that, then you’re gonna leave it like that.

I disagree with the corporations playing God and taking away freedom of speech on both sides, basically.

Lakhar goes on to speak of his moral reservations to engaging in Google’s job outsourcing programs, sending American jobs to China.

I can’t keep doing this. Go and teach Chinese people how to do American jobs and come back and get survived on the way. Morally and ethically I disagree… I feel suffocated at Google.

Tech companies such as Twitter, Google and Facebook have implemented a level of political censorship never before seen in the history of the United States in the runup to the 2020 presidential election. It’s time for a regulatory standard that treats these monopolies as utilities, and ensures access to the digital public square for all.

 

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


Trending