Big Tech censorship has been a massive problem over the past few years.
Joe Biden would not have won if true information wasn’t being censored from social media.
And Mark Zuckerberg has some explaining to do after one message just got banned.
Pro-life group censored online
The New York Post’s bombshell report about Hunter Biden’s “laptop from hell” was censored on Facebook and Twitter.
Facebook admitted that it suppressed the story, and Twitter banned it entirely.
If not for that censorship, Donald Trump likely would have won the 2020 Presidential election.
Four years later with Trump about to be sworn in again as President, Big Tech has shifted its position on censorship.
Elon Musk purchased Twitter and opened up the platform again to free speech, and Facebook creator and Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced that he was changing the content moderation policies on his social media platforms.
However, conservatives are still being targeted on the sites.
For example, the pro-life news outlet LifeNews was banned from Facebook and Instagram for sharing a pro-life medical video.
Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) sent a letter to Meta on behalf of LifeNews calling for the company to reinstate the pro-life organization on social media.
ADF wrote in the letter, “Earlier this week, Meta admitted to ‘making too many mistakes’ and announced sweeping changes to its content moderation policies in a renewed commitment to free speech. These changes are laudable, but as we explain below, much work remains for Meta to truly safeguard free speech. Recently, Meta permanently disabled the Facebook and Instagram accounts of Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com (‘LifeNews’), and Abby Covington. While Meta claimed it did so because of Facebook’s Community Standards on ‘human exploitation’ and ‘child sexual exploitation,’ those standards are patently inapplicable. The targeted posts were heartfelt pro-life messages that are as far from human and child exploitation as possible. At best, these examples illustrate how deeply flawed Meta’s content moderation mechanisms are, and at worst, they suggest that Meta is targeting pro-life views for censorship.”
This is a common tactic of leftist censors at tech companies.
They claim that pro-life messages are somehow child exploitation or something unconscionable like that.
In 2019, a whistleblower at Pinterest revealed how Live Action, another pro-life organization, was being censored on the site.
Litmus test for Meta
The “child sexual exploitation” in the LifeNews video was simply a child being born.
ADF’s letter explained, “On May 22, 2024, Mr. Ertelt shared through his Facebook account a short video depicting a doctor performing a C-section. During the procedure, the yet unborn child grabbed the finger of the performing physician. The video’s caption stated: ‘An unborn baby can’t be just a clump of cells when he or she is grabbing the doctor’s hand.’”
The Left will defend literal pornography in schools.
But an actual baby being born is a bridge too far.
ADF concluded, “Meta has recently promised to change its ways and protect free speech on its platforms. These situations provide a litmus test for whether Meta will live up to its public announcement or continue to censor and restrict the marketplace of ideas.”
Zuckerberg had a chance to prove that he was serious about changing his company’s ways.
Stay tuned to Unmuzzled News for any updates to this ongoing story.
