Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center is so giddy at the prospect of Elon Musk suing the Anti-Defamation League for pointing out anti-Semitism on Twitter (well, X) -- so much so that it called in racist cartoonist Scott Adams to defend Musk -- that it failed to tell its readers that around the same time, Twitter CEO :Linda Yaccarino rushed to post a policy on anti-Semitism that 1) had to be edited several times and 2) was posted late on a Friday night, when many Jews are observing the Sabbath. No mention either of how Twitter is contining to place ads from major advertisers next to anti-Semitic content. It also won't tell readers how Musk has said not only that he will continue to cozy up to China -- which the MRC once criticized -- but hat he thinks there are two sides to China's ongoing repression and alleged genocide of the country's ethnic Uyghur population.
Instead, the MRC is a Musk fanboy and will excuse pretty much anything he does. Gabriela Pariseau hyped another "Twitter files" thing in a Sept. 11 post, claiming that "Twitter employees worked with a Saudi Arabian social media “spy ring” to “unmask” accounts critical of the government. When the DOJ exposed the operation, Twitter executives helped cover up the platform’s role." Pariseau also claimed that the writer of it, Lee Fang, is an "independent investigative reporter" despite the fact that given Fang is writing what Muak told him to write -- like all the other "Twitter files" reporters -- he cannot possibly be "independent."
The MRC's tunnel vision over Twitter holding right-wingers accountable for their hate and misinformation -- which the MRC likes to dishonestly portray as "censorship" -- kicked in again as Pariseau whined in a Sept. 13 post:
Elon Musk’s X (formerly Twitter) has once again embraced silent suppression and has begun placing sensitive content filters on nearly every original media post from a government watchdog organization.
The American Accountability Foundation reported on Substack Monday that Twitter has begun censoring much of its content. The group has worked to expose the President of the American Library Association Emily Drabinski as a leftist activist dimissing parental concerns and pushing wild LGBT ideologies in libraries.
AAF says they immediately saw apparent backlash via X censorship. “[A]fter we posted images of the LGBTQ books they are pushing on our children, X (Twitter) hit our account with a ‘sensitive content’ warning on ALL OUR MEDIA POSTS, and shadowbanned our account so that you won’t find us in a search on X.”
A content warning is not "censorship," however much Pariseau wants you to believe otherwise. By contrast, the MRC refused to call Musk adding a needless delay when a user clicks on a link in a tweet that went to certain websites Musk hates was somehow not "censorship."
The next day, Catherine Salgado was back to Musk PR mode:
X (formerly Twitter) owner Elon Musk says the platform should be for moderate Americans, not just leftists.
The All In Podcast, which is hosted by David Sacks, Chamath Palihapitiya, Jason Calacanis, and David Friedberg, posted an interview they did with Elon Musk at the All In Summit. During the interview, Musk noted that, in the past, social media has all been “very left-leaning to far left-leaning,” suspending Republicans far more than leftists. He also expressed his goal of changing that online monopoly. The X owner and billionaire said that “The suspensions of several Republican candidates, interests, or voices were at least ten times the rate of—suppression of left-wing voices.” He also expressed his goal of changing that online monopoly and allowing free speech for people of all political stripes. His comments, however, come amidst new censorship policies on X, including an increased emphasis on freedom of speech, not reach.
Musk specifically addressed the accusation that he is somehow making Twitter a right-wing conspiracy morass. “[Our goal with] the X platform is really meant to be a level playing field, a public square that is supportive of…most of the country, the middle 80%,” he said. Musk noted that before he bought the platform “Social media ha[d been] very left-leaning to far left-leaning, and really Twitter was far-left leaning.”
He continued: “The suspensions of several Republican candidates, interests, or voices were at least ten times the rate of—suppression of left-wing voices on, you know, [the] old Twitter.”
Musk offered no proof to back up this claim, and Salgado apparently made no effort to ask for any. She also did not disclose that Sacks is a pro-Musk loyalist who helped run Twitter after Musk bought it, so there was never going to be any tough questioning here. Instead, she huffed that right-wing hate was still being moderated as she groused that Musk "did not address the fact that anti-woke individuals are still censored on Twitter."
When the Washington Post reported how Twitter is cooperating with German authorities in providing information on accounts linked to hate crimes -- whihc tracks with reports that Twitter has regularly complied with similar data reports from other countries, even more so than it did prior to Musk's ownership -- Tom Olohan ran to Musk's defense in a Sept. 19 post, again repeating the MRC dishonest mantra that trying to address hate and lies on Twitter is "censorship":
X owner Elon Musk gave a warning to any X (formerly Twitter) employees who bow to outside pressure and censor free speech.
Musk responded harshly to a Washington Post article that claimed his social media platform was cooperating with German censorship requests. In a Sept. 17 X post, Musk wrote, “At the risk of stating the obvious, I don’t know what’s going on with every part of this platform all the time, but our policy worldwide is to fight for maximum freedom of speech under the law.”
While this statement left room for X to censor content that is violative of local laws, Musk warned his employees not to go farther. “Anyone working for X Corp who does not operate according to this principle will be invited to further their career at any one of the other social media companies who sell their soul for a buck,” Musk added.
Musk’s statements coincide with many of his previous commitments to free speech. However, since Musk purchased the social media platform back in 2022, his choice to reinstate prominent accounts such as Christian satire website The Babylon Bee and Canadian professor Dr. Jordan Peterson and his allowance of honest discussion on social issues have apparently been met with internal resistance.
Olohan whined that Twitter cooperating with Germany was somehow Germany's fault because it does not have "freedom of speech":
But Musk’s commitment to allowing legal speech, although heartening news for those who live in the free world, may provide little relief for those in Germany and countries with similar laws. The Post claimed that X “is complying with requests to turn over more information about its users to prosecutors in online hate-crime investigations.”
The liberal rag added that Germany “has strict hate-speech laws forbidding certain defamation of politicians and promotion of white supremacy, and the company under Musk has turned over reams of user data to prosecutors to help identify those who break the law, according to three prosecutor offices who spoke with The Washington Post.”
German “citizens” do not have freedom of speech or the right to make choices about their child’s education. The Post article even mentioned a case against a man for being rude to a politician. Absurdly, this article ended with a quote attempting to distinguish Germany from authoritarian governments.
Olohan didn't expalin why hateful white supremaicsm and Nazism should be allowed to spread unchecked, or why it's "censorship" to try and stop something so obvoiusly sickening and evil.
