A short rant about government, secrecy and censorship.
I keep having weird stuff happening on my Facebook recently in regard to Facebook "moderation" for lack of a better word.
I tend to use the word censor, however, in this case what I posted wasn't totally removed or deleted and just fitted with a "cover".
This one, I found very interesting... Well, I find pretty much all of them very interesting or sometimes confusing.
And I've made similar posts like this before about when I've had pictures of animals being hurt or killed for food or cloths or other reasons or innocent people being hurt or killed in wars.
But, I wanted to echo those sentiments and continue to ask the question of...
Why is one of the arms of government "Facebook" censoring what it's own government and ruling class is doing if it's justified?
I logged on yesterday to see that an old image on my page was censored and had a cover put over it...
The image that got censored was... An old black and white picture of the ceremony of the Cremation of Care at the Bohemian Grove! Wow...
This is the first time I've ever had a picture of Bohemian Grove censored that I can remember. Do you know what Bohemian Grove is?
It's a place in California where the powerful elite of the world come together once a year to basically party and let go of their "cares".
Quite a few presidents have admitted to going there or have been found on member lists... And one former president even credited the speech he did at the Grove as and I'm paraphrasing from memory...
But, he said that was the most significant speech/thing that led to him becoming president of the U.S. He basically credited the Grove with him becoming president.
That same guy(Nixon) also is quoted as saying something to the effect of... "Anyone can aspire to be President of the United States, but few have any hope of becoming president of the Bohemian Club"
Oh, by the way... At the Bohemian Grove they also partake in a ritual of a mock human sacrifice under giant redwood trees and a huge artificial stone/concrete owl.
They dress up in weird robes and play music and have a boat that floats across and even special effects in the form of some kind of fireworks or something, it's pretty fascinating and unsettling as well.
The picture that got censored/covered was of one of these "mock"(?) human sacrifices... BUT, that is suppose to be a MOCK. IE... Not a real human!
Are they going to censor Halloween costumes next?
Cause... According to the Grove members, those fake/mock human sacrifices and are not real human beings.
But, let's just stop for a second and ask again... Why are our leaders getting together to burn a mock human which via audio recording screams and dies in pain each year?
Isn't that kind of odd...? They are "cremating their cares" and cheering when a mock human violently screams being burned alive? I think that's weird... Anyways...
The picture is really old and in black and white... Maybe it was a real person and not a mock? How do we know for sure?
Either way, I think it's absolutely fascinating that Facebook decided to censor this image of what is advertisied by the people who run Bohemian Grove as just a mock dead body, and not a real human dead body.
Is this the kind of absurdity of censorship we see at FB? Are they so inept they are censoring historical pictures that alledegly involve no actual real violence? Are they going to censor pictures of Burning Man next? (PS That event I believe is likely connected to the same ritual they are doing at Bohemian Grove)
Or... Maybe that was a real murder. Maybe they are censoring a picture of a real human body...? If so, that's a whole other serious conversation in itself that almost no one seems to want to have cause it seems like many if not most people are terrified of researching the secret government and the occult rulers very much.
Either way, this is another reason why I can't wait for new and better social media technology that is less censored like steem to become more widespread.
I've never been censored on steem. And you'd pretty much have to literally do something illegal to get censored on there.
Plus, I've made a good chunk of money on steem as well where I've never made a single penny on any other social media.
In my opinion... Steem based social media like steempeak or steemit are so much better than old traditional social media like Facebook, instagram, etc.
To be fair to FB at least they only covered the image and didn't remove it completely this time.
And steem social media also have a NSFW feature as well that covers "graphic" images, I'm not necessarily against that idea as I do think it's helpful for viewers who don't want to see disturbing things.
But, I still think it should be a choice of the user to set that and not be forced on everyone.
And... It's still kind of absurd to me that a picture I posted like 6 years ago that's an old black and white historical photo of what appears to be a "mock" human sacrifice, similar to something kids might dress up as on Halloween was censored to a degree... It's just crazy. ;
This also brings me back to the question of if it's good enough for our government and leaders to do, then why can't we even share pictures or information about such...?
Maybe it's because there's two different worlds and sets of "rules", one for the regular people and one for the people in power.
Yet, so many still seem to think that the system of law treats us all fairly or that their vote matters or that the politicians are doing a necessary job.
However, as long as we are separated and split into two different worlds of such nature, I think there will then probably always be an unhealthy disconnect... An imbalance... One which holds our species back and which serves a minority at the expense of the majority.
K. I'm done for now. Peace and bye until next time.
Hello @apolymask,
how about looking at this issue from this perspective: Everything you put into the world by speaking, photographing, filming, writing, designing is heard, seen, read and interpreted by someone. People understand this differently. When you publish a picture, you do not know in virtual space who the viewer of this picture might be. It eludes your knowledge.
Freedom of the press and freedom of opinion originates from a time before the digital media, so an opinion of a non-professional person was limited in time and a press product was reserved for journalists and media people. The former only had a certain - usually small - range - the latter a large range. Both possibilities of expression were nevertheless subject to the customary law of the country in which the people lived.
That is different today. Facebook & all digital media cross borders and laws and can be received in all countries. So what leaves the piety of one person cold may attack the piety of another. One does not know. Since one does not know, there is now an attempt to somehow do justice to all piety.
If Facebook operates under the censorship that no violent content or content of pornographic content should be shown and this is directed, for example, according to US law, it is obvious that any content that looks like violence or pornography will be censored.
The public space here in Germany prohibits certain types of advertising and images. I think this is okay, because it would be no question for any parent that no scenes of violence or other posters that violate piety are shown at bus stops or advertising pillars. You simply don't want to expect small children to see such scenes. Understandably so.
Since digital space cannot obtain any information at all about who the recipients of pictures, videos or memes are, it has to operate with probabilities. The intention is therefore probably to keep the spread of impassive content as small as possible. Since you are not the only one who posts content on FB and people do not abide by laws, but also post content recklessly and without thinking, how do you want to prevent such things that unsettle or annoy the many different recipients, especially when it concerns their ethical feelings? In the digital space, the inhibition threshold is much smaller, simply posting content without any ifs and buts. Anonymity still does its part.
In principle, no matter which law applies in your country, you have the full responsibility for publishing. Anything you distribute in the world, you could ask about your own ethics. You might ask yourself: is there a chance that someone is not able to handle what I publish? In order not to be misunderstood, do I perhaps have to give an explanation of my meme or picture? How much do I contribute to people starting to argue, hate, doubt, oppose, lose hope or get lost in apocalyptic theories based on postings? Can I design the statement that I personally consider important in a form that is based on consensus and cooperation? Is it even necessary that I publish exactly this post? What do I want to achieve with it? Many followers? Thumbs up? Why?
We have only recently become globally networked in this way. There is no really consensual approach to this yet. We are in the middle of a changing media landscape, which, like journalists in the past, is asking us what message we actually want to get across. Why should I post something daily or hourly? And so on. Only when the last doubt in my own mind has been cleared up have I possibly gained the certainty that what I am disseminating in terms of content is of a quality that I want to impose on others. So the responsibility should always lie with myself first.
The assumptions you have made indicate that you suspect personal censorship. I think you should start by assuming the opposite and, as has already been said, assume an automatism behind it. How well or badly this automatism works and how it censors or does not censor the individual postings and can always be questioned. There is ultimately no final answer to this. You are left alone with this question and that is, I think, not the worst thing.
Technically, most of the censorship is automatic now in that Facebook staff input the parameters, the keywords, the images, the videos, the links, the specific things, that they choose to ban, delete, flag, hide, etc. Now, in the past, most of the censorship was manual in that people would click on the report button to flag the posts, the comments, the messages, etc, which would notify the moderators who would then delete those things in most cases if you are a conservative posting the stuff and generally ignore the flags, the reported content, if you're a leftist. Like a free pass, a double standard. Well, based on my own observations, most of the censorship is automatic now and is constantly updated. They continue to add new things onto their ban list. Sadly, they probably keep the ban list private. But if they wanted to be honest, they would keep their ban list public so that we could make sure we don't put any of those things onto Facebook. It is that simple. If they want us not to do it, then they should tell us not to do it. Common sense 101 lol.
I agree with most of what you said. I'm not sure about the conservative/liberal right/left bent, though, have heard of that before and I'm open minded to it. I agree, they should have the ban list public so we can know. And I also have to wonder what event triggered them to suddenly ban that image, I doubt it was me like you said and more automated... But, I'm sure SOMETHING triggered them to suddenly ban that image and I wonder what it was.
Technically, it can be more complex than that. For example, if Facebook was tax-payer funded, then they should be liable in the same way government is supposed to be accountable to the voters who also pay taxes. In other words, if Facebook is governmental, then they should not be treated like private companies. Also, Facebook should have been honest from day one concerning their rules. But one of the problems is in how Facebook changes their rules again and again and Facebook selectively enforces their rules when they want and to whoever they want. Facebook said it was a platform for all ideas and Facebook has violated that statement. That is a scam. So, they should be sued or taken to court for fraud and for other things as well including violating the fourth amendment.
Facebook removed my Hitler photos.
Hmm... Was there some kind of words or text included with the pictures that may have been controversial or were they literally just pictures of Hitler...?
I was censored on Facebook and Twitter in 2018 for this Hitler photo which included a quote from something Hitler might have said, that Hitler was fighting against the Jews and for Allah.
Twitter Banned Me
2018-05-20 - Sunday - 02:20 PM - Steemit Post
Que cosas tan raras se pueden encontrar navegando @apolymask, quizás ya hay demasiadas reglas y por eso simplemente bloquean algo para no entrar en polémica.
What strange things can be found sailing @apolymask, maybe there are already too many rules and that's why they simply block something so as not to enter into controversy.
Hmm.. Not sure I totally understand what you mean, however, I do think there are too many rules and who knows maybe that does have something to do with what's going on. I wish I knew!
Hello @apolymask, apparently it will always be like that, at least that's what the history of different cultures tells us, it's unfortunate but that's the way it is...
Hola @apolymask, al parecer siempre será así, por lo menos eso nos dice la historia de diferentes culturas, es lamentable pero así es…
Maybe it will... I hope not, but maybe you're right. And yes, history shows us a lot... Though, I don't think we are destined to repeat what happened before.
Curated for #informationwar (by @wakeupnd)
Delegate to the @informationwar! project and get rewarded
Congratulations @apolymask! You have completed the following achievement on the Steem blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
You can view your badges on your Steem Board and compare to others on the Steem Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPTo support your work, I also upvoted your post!
Do not miss the last post from @steemitboard:
Vote for @Steemitboard as a witness to get one more award and increased upvotes!
Un enfoque bastante aceptable @apolymask…
A fairly acceptable approach @apolymask…
I'm not sure what you mean?