Why we are so stupid: the media (including social media) THGR, THIS IS FOR YOU
POSTED BY: SignyM
UPDATED: Sunday, June 8, 2025 03:37
VIEWED: 3519
PAGE 2 of 2
Quote:
Leaked Docs Reveal Shocking Extent Of DHS "Disinfo" Collusion With Twitter, Facebook
....
Now, leaked documents provided to The Intercept reveal that government collusion with big tech goes much deeper[ than what Zuckerberg admitted to]
The effort began in 2018, after former President Donald Trump signed the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Act in the wake of several high-profile hacking incidents, forming a new wing of DHS devoted to protecting critical national infrastructure.
* The Department of Homeland Security is quietly broadening its efforts to curb speech it considers dangerous, an investigation by The Intercept has found. Years of internal DHS memos, emails, and documents — obtained via leaks and an ongoing lawsuit, as well as public documents — illustrate an expansive effort by the agency to influence tech platforms.
The work, much of which remains unknown to the American public, came into clearer view earlier this year when DHS announced a new “Disinformation Governance Board”: a panel designed to police misinformation (false information spread unintentionally), disinformation (false information spread intentionally), and malinformation (factual information shared, typically out of context, with harmful intent) that allegedly threatens U.S. interests.*
Whatever those are.
That's why it's so important for people to develop for themselves a clear answer to "what are America's interests?" bc otherwise we will be hoodwinked over and over again into supporting actions that are bad for us
Quote:oh, does she mean, like, the truth???
While the board was widely ridiculed, immediately scaled back, and then shut down within a few months, other initiatives are underway as DHS pivots to monitoring social media now that its original mandate — the war on terror — has been wound down.
* Behind closed doors, and through pressure on private platforms, the U.S. government has used its power to try to shape online discourse. According to meeting minutes and other records appended to a lawsuit filed by Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt, a Republican who is also running for Senate, discussions have ranged from the scale and scope of government intervention in online discourse to the mechanics of streamlining takedown requests for false or intentionally misleading information. -The Intercept *
"Platforms have got to get comfortable with gov’t. It’s really interesting how hesitant they remain," said Microsoft exec and former DHS official Matt Masterson in a February text to Jen Easterly, a DHS director.
* FBI agent Laura Dehmlow was in communications w Facebook that led to the suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story in 2020 over the false allegation that it was “disinfo.” This year, she met w/ Twitter/DHS to stress “we need a media infrastructure that is held accountable.” pic.twitter.com/17LqhEyMN0
— Lee Fang (@lhfang) October 31, 2022 *
Then, in a March 2022 meeting, FBI official Laura Dehmlow warned that the 'threat of subversive information on social media'
Quote:To who? The government?
could undermine support for the US government - stressing "we need a media infrastructure that is held accountable."
So much for The Press being a watchdog on government!
Quote:
Representatives from JPMorgan Chase
Why??? What dog do THEY have in THIS fight?
Quote:
attended virtually all DHS meetings about federal government efforts to censor "disinformation" on social media.
* Are they laying the groundwork for "de-banking" to become an (even more) mainstream strategy?
https://t.co/yTIeLvQjr2 pic.twitter.com/BFehCIupDQ
— Natalie Winters (@nataliegwinters) October 31, 2022
FBI OFFICIALS are being REASSIGNED from AL QAEDA and ISIS assignments ---> to investigating AMERICANS pic.twitter.com/OF09QXIsek
— Crab Man (@crabcrawler1) October 31, 2022 *
Twitter has denied the report, telling ThNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
THE INTERCEPT: Truth Cops
Leaked Documents Outline DHS’s Plans to Police Disinformation
https://theintercept.com/2022/10/31/social-media-disinformation-dhs/
NATIONAL REVIEW: Leaked Documents Reveal DHS Collaborated with Facebook to Target ‘Disinformation’
https://www.nationalreview.com/news/leaked-documents-reveal-dhs-collab
orated-with-facebook-to-target-disinformation/
REASON: DHS Still Policing Disinformation Despite Dissolving Disinformation Governance Board
The Department of Homeland Security and the FBI regularly report misinformation and disinformation to tech companies for potential removal.
https://reason.com/2022/10/31/dhs-still-policing-disinformation-despit
e-dissolving-disinformation-governance-board/
Quote:
The subsequent military defeat of ISIS forces in Syria and Iraq, along with the withdrawal from Afghanistan, left the homeland security apparatus without a target.
Sounds like they don't have a reason to exist anymore and should be disbanded like NATO should have been.
--------------------------------------------------
Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I mean seriously. This is huge news. The bigger story is that the Legacy Media won't even report on it.
But I can't even act as though I'm surprised. This is the type of shit I was telling everybody would happen when GWB signed that Patriot Act into law. OF COURSE they're doing all of this... and more. Much much more.
My only question now is, how many "conspiracy theories" do I believe today that will be admitted to a public that doesn't give a shit about them 21 years from now.
DHS and the Powers that be don't worry for one second about this leak. Hell they might have even put it out there themselves just to test the waters. In that case, I'm sure they love what they see because everything is going according to plan.
--------------------------------------------------
Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Facebook engineer admits site 'automatically demotes' anti-Kamala posts to 'help the Democrats'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-13970987/Facebook-engi
neer-admits-site-automatically-demotes-anti-Kamala-posts-help-Democrats.html
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Jamie Lee Curtis makes emotional plea to Mark Zuckerberg over disturbing use of AI images
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-14705491/Jamie-Lee-Curti
s-AI-fake-image-mark-zuckerberg.html
Landmark antitrust trial could force Zuckerberg to sell Instagram
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cedy2ygy50do
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Where Ted (THG) gets a lot of his ideas: TED talks
Quote:
When Ideas Become Too Dangerous To Platform: TED Talk Censored
Economist Professor Gigi Foster delivered a TEDx talk titled The Manipulators’ Playbook at the University of New South Wales (UNSW) in October 2024.
It was a bold examination of how, in times of crisis, fear and conformity can be deliberately harnessed by those in power to manipulate public behaviour and silence dissent.
Her message was a call to defend the freedom to question, to challenge authority, and to think independently.
The local TEDxUNSW team, who had worked closely with Foster to ensure her talk met TEDx standards, described it as “insightful and important.”
But when the video was submitted to TED’s US headquarters for publication on the organisation’s official YouTube channel, it was rejected.
The reason? The talk “did not adhere to the TEDx content guidelines.”
A Defence of Dissent—Silenced
Foster’s talk drew on the Covid-19 experience, arguing that during the pandemic, the space for critical thought collapsed. Dissenters were vilified, and dialogue gave way to dogma.
She described how critics of mainstream Covid responses were smeared with labels—“a danger to public health…a tinfoil hat-wearing conspiracy theorist…probably a prepper or a cooker…almost surely a far-right extremist and probably racist to boot.”
Drawing comparisons with the Cultural Revolution and the rise of Nazi Germany, she warned that the marginalisation of dissent has deep historical roots—where enemies of the state are manufactured to maintain social control.
Foster recalled being labelled a “granny killer,” defamed online (despite never having a Twitter account), and receiving death threats for questioning lockdown policies.
“Well, I didn’t shut up,” she said. “And today, more than four years on… hundreds of books, academic papers, and tragic personal stories confirm I was right.”
“The lockdowns didn’t save lives. They were rather a massive human sacrifice induced by fear, politics, and money,” she added.
A Bureaucracy That Cannot Handle Dissent
By December 2024, with the video still unpublished, TEDxUNSW informed Foster that the US team had flagged her talk for further review.
She was asked to submit additional evidence to substantiate her claims—particularly those relating to lockdowns, mass vaccination, and censorship.
Foster complied, providing a detailed annotation backed by peer-reviewed studies, public health data, and academic commentary. But it wasn’t enough.
On 22 December, the local team relayed a list of statements TED deemed “potentially contentious,” including her description of lockdowns as a “massive human sacrifice,” her comparisons to authoritarian regimes, and her criticisms of public health leaders.
Despite acknowledging that her arguments were “compelling,” TEDx informed Foster on 21 March 2025 that the talk had been formally rejected—and could not be published on any platform.
“We were truly disappointed that TEDx did not approve your talk,” the organisers wrote to Foster, “especially given how insightful and important your message is.”
Surprised—particularly after months of collaboration—Foster asked for an official explanation. TED’s US office responded:
Supporting open dialogue, thoughtful debate, and critical thinking about issues affecting local communities is an important part of TED and TEDx’s mission…[However] talks should not attack political and public health leaders, promote their own initiatives or business endeavours, denigrate those who don’t share the speaker’s own beliefs, use polarising ‘us vs. them’ language and divisive rhetoric, or broadly dismiss peer-reviewed research around science and health. Upon further review of the associated materials and talk content, we therefore determined that Foster’s talk did not adhere to the TEDx content guidelines and will not be added to our YouTube channel.”
Foster pushed back, arguing that her talk aligned with TED’s statNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME