Facebooks zuivering van de alternatieve (nieuws) media staat nog in de kinderschoenen

De neoconservatieve oorlogshitser en voorstander van censuur op het Internet, Jamie Fly, heeft gesteld dat de Facebook censuur van een groot aantal accounts nog maar het begin is van een grote zuivering die de alternatieve media te wachten staat.

Fly is o.a. directeur van het Asia programma van de neoconservatieve denktank German Marshall Fund (GMF), een organisatie die zowel door de VS overheid als haar oorlogshond de NAVO wordt betaald……. Ofwel de grootste terreurentiteit op aarde, de VS, die in feite het opperbevel heeft over de NAVO troepen, subsidieert een denktank die de ene leugen na de andere produceert…… Deze denktank verzint verhalen om zo als tegenwicht te dienen tegen het echte nieuws, dat niet door de reguliere media wordt gebracht, maar door de alternatieve media op het internet…….

Intussen een cliché op deze plek: mensen lees het hieronder opgenomen duidelijke artikel van Max Blumenthal en Jeb Sprague over de manier waarop men het volk wil blijven belazeren met verhalen over Russische (en andere) inmenging in de VS politiek (en die van andere westerse landen). Een berg leugens waaraan overigens intussen ook China werd toegevoegd. Lees het artikel en geeft het ajb door, het hele Russiagate verhaal is onderuit gehaald als een hoax*, echter dat interesseert figuren als Fly en organisaties als The Atlantic Council (een lobbyorgaan van de NAVO), het eerder genoemd German Marshall Fund en de andere oplichters van dit soort ‘denktanks’, geen ene zier, de kracht zit in de herhaling door de reguliere (massa-) media en politici, gewoon volhouden dat Rusland en landen als China (ook Iran wordt genoemd) de politiek in het westen beïnvloeden met leugens en andere zaken die de ‘publieke opinie’ zouden sturen……

In feite is de grote schuldige voor al deze ellende Hillary Clinton, die het stelen van de democratische voorverkiezingen door haar en het team dat haar terzijde stond, wilde verbergen en daarom kwam met het verhaal dat de Russen zaken zouden hebben gelekt naar de pers, een flagrante leugen, die de media maar al te graag oppakten in hun strijd tegen de alternatieve media op het internet…..

De continue herhaling van leugens over Russische en andere bemoeienis met de VS politiek, zorgt ervoor dat de leugens bij de gebruikers van die media als het ware in het hoofd worden geprint (een vorm van hersenspoeling), dit ondanks alle bewijzen van het tegendeel, bewijzen als officiële documenten van de VS overheid, die onder meer in WikiLeaks terug zijn te vinden…..

Vandaar ook dat de hierboven aangehaalde rechtse denktanks, die niet alleen de NAVO en de VS dienen, maar ook het militair-industrieel complex, hameren op censuur van de sociale media en dan m.n. de sites die nieuws brengen, ofwel dat nieuws op de juiste manier analyseren….. Die alternatieve media tonen verder de leugens aan die de westerse bevolking dagelijks over zich heen gekieperd krijgen via de reguliere media en het grootste deel van de westerse liegende politici, plus natuurlijk de leugens van die rechtse denktanks zelf….

Vergeet voorts niet dat er kilometers bewijs zijn voor juist de VS die de politiek in andere landen manipuleert en probeert te sturen via: -hacken, -verspreiding van fake news, -economische oorlogsvoering, -staatsgrepen en mocht dat allemaal niet lukken, desnoods middels -een illegale oorlog, die het deze eeuw al 5 keer is begonnen (en dat zijn enorme oorlogsmisdaden, waarvoor dit land niet wordt vervolgd….)……. 5 illegale oorlogen die intussen aan ruim meer dan 2 miljoen mensen het leven hebben gekost………

De wereld op z’n kop…..

Facebook
Purge of Alternative Media “Just the Beginning”: Top Neocon
Insider

Afbeeldingsresultaat voor Facebook Purge of Alternative Media “Just the Beginning”: Top Neocon Insider
(foto rechts Jamie Fly
October 24, 2018 at 11:21 am

Written
by 
Grayzone
Project

(GP— This
October, Facebook and Twitter deleted the accounts of hundreds of
users, including many alternative media outlets maintained by
American users. Among those wiped out in the coordinated purge were
popular sites that scrutinized police brutality and U.S.
interventionism, like The Free Thought Project, Anti-Media, and Cop
Block, along with the pages of journalists like 
Rachel
Blevins
.

Facebook claimed that
these pages had “broken our rules against spam and coordinated
inauthentic behavior.” However, sites like The Free Thought Project
were verified by Facebook and widely recognized as legitimate sources
of news and opinion. John Vibes, an independent reporter who
contributed to Free Thought,
accused Facebook
of “favoring mainstream sources and silencing alternative voices.”

In
comments published here for the first time, a neoconservative
Washington insider has apparently claimed a degree of credit for the
recent purge — and promised more takedowns in the near future.

Russia,
China, and other foreign states take advantage of our open political
system,” remarked Jamie Fly, a senior fellow and director of the
Asia program at the influential think tank the German Marshall Fund,
which is 
funded
by the U.S. government and NATO
.
“They can invent stories that get repeated and spread through
different sites. So we are just starting to push back. Just this last
week Facebook began starting to take down sites. So this is just the
beginning.”

Fly
went on to complain that “all you need is an email” to set up a
Facebook or Twitter account, lamenting the sites’ accessibility to
members of the general public. He predicted a long struggle on a
global scale to fix the situation, and pointed out that to do so
would require constant vigilance.

Fly
made these stunning comments to Jeb Sprague, who is a visiting
faculty in sociology at the University of California-Santa Barbara
and co-author of this article. The two spoke during a lunch break at
conference
on Asian security
 organized
by the 
Stiftung
Wissenschaft und Politik
 (SWP) in
Berlin, Germany.

In
the tweet below, Fly is the third person from the left who appears
seated at the table.

              

Garima Mohan@GarimaMo

A rare opportunity to discuss Asian security in Berlin, with an excellent group of experts from the region @SWPBerlin

The
remarks by Fly — “we are just starting to push back” — seemed
to confirm the worst fears of the alternative online media community.
If he was to be believed, the latest purge was motivated by politics,
not spam prevention, and was driven by powerful interests hostile to
dissident views, particularly where American state violence is
concerned.

Jamie
Fly, Rise of a Neocon Cadre

Jamie
Fly is an influential foreign policy hardliner who has spent the last
year lobbying for the censorship of “fringe views” on social
media. Over the years, he has advocated for a military assault on
Iran, a 
regime
change war
 on
Syria, and hiking military spending to unprecedented levels. He is
the embodiment of a neoconservative cadre.

Like
so many second-generation neocons, Fly 
entered
government

by burrowing into mid-level positions in George W. Bush’s National
Security Council and Department of Defense.

In
2009, he was appointed director of the 
Foreign
Policy Initiative

(FPI), a rebranded version of Bill Kristol’s Project for a New
American Century, or PNAC. The latter outfit was an umbrella group of
neoconservative activists that first made the case for an invasion of
Iraq as part of a wider project of regime change in countries that
resisted Washington’s sphere of influence.

By
2011, Fly was advancing the next phase in PNAC’s blueprint
by 
clamoring for
military strikes on Iran. “More diplomacy is not an adequate
response,” he argued. A year later, Fly 
urged the
US to “expand its list of targets beyond the [Iranian] nuclear
program to key command and control elements of the Republican Guard
and the intelligence ministry, and facilities associated with other
key government officials.”

Fly
soon found his way into the senate office of Marco Rubio, a
neoconservative pet project, assuming a role as his top foreign
policy advisor. Amongst other interventionist initiatives, Rubio has
taken the lead in promoting harsh economic sanctions 
targeting
Venezuela
,
even advocating for a U.S. 
military
assault
 on
the country. When Rubio’s 2016 presidential campaign floundered
amid a mass revolt of the Republican Party’s middle American base
against the party establishment, Fly was forced to cast about for new
opportunities.

He
found them in the paranoid atmosphere of 
Russiagate that
formed soon after Donald Trump’s shock election victory.

PropOrNot
Sparks the Alternative Media Panic

A
journalistic insider’s account of the Hillary Clinton presidential
campaign, Shattered, revealed that “in the days after
the election, Hillary declined to take responsibility for her own
loss.” Her top advisers were summoned the following day, according
to the book, “to engineer the case that the election wasn’t
entirely on the up-and-up … Already, Russian hacking was the
centerpiece of the argument.”

Less
than three weeks after Clinton’s defeat, the Washington Post’s
Craig Timberg published a 
dubiously
sourced report
 headlined,
“Russian propaganda effort helped spread ‘fake news.’” The
article hyped up a McCarthyite effort by a shadowy, anonymously run
organization called PropOrNot to blacklist some 200 American media
outlets as Russian “online propaganda.”

The
alternative media outfits on the 
PropOrNot
blacklist
 included
some of those recently purged by Facebook and Twitter, such as The
Free Thought Project and Anti-Media. Among the 
criteria
PropOrNot identified as signs of Russian propaganda were “Support
for policies like Brexit, and the breakup of the EU and Eurozone”
and “Opposition to Ukrainian resistance to Russia and Syrian
resistance to Assad.” PropOrNot called for “formal investigations
by the U.S. government” into the outlets it had blacklisted.

According
to Craig Timberg, the Washington Post correspondent who uncritically
promoted the media suppression initiative, Propornot was established
by “a nonpartisan collection of researchers with foreign policy,
military and technology backgrounds.” Timberg quoted a figure
associated with the George Washington University Center for Cyber and
Homeland Security, Andrew Weisburd, and cited a report he wrote with
his colleague, Clint Watts, on Russian meddling.

Timberg’s
piece on was PropOrNot was promoted widely by 
former
top Clinton staffers
 and celebrated by
ex-Obama White House aide Dan Pfeiffer as “the biggest story in the
world.” But after a wave of stinging criticism, including in the
pages of the 
New
Yorker
,
the article was amended with an editor’s note stating, “The
[Washington] Post… does not itself vouch for the validity of
PropOrNot’s findings regarding any individual media outlet.”

PropOrNot
had been seemingly exposed as a McCarthyite sham, but the concept
behind it — exposing online American media outlets as vehicles for
Kremlin “active measures” — continued to flourish.

The
Birth of the Russian Bot Tracker — with U.S. Government Money

By
August, a new, and seemingly related initiative appeared out of the
blue, this time with backing from a bipartisan coalition of
Democratic foreign policy hands and neocon Never

Trumpers
in Washington. Called the 
Alliance
for Securing Democracy
 (ASD),
the outfit aimed to expose how supposed Russian Twitter bots were
infecting American political discourse with divisive narratives. It
featured a daily “
Hamilton
68

online dashboard that highlighted the supposed bot activity with
easily digestible charts. Conveniently, the site avoided naming any
of the digital Kremlin influence accounts it claimed to be tracking.

The
initiative was immediately 
endorsed
by John Podesta
,
the founder of the Democratic Party think tank the Center for
American Progress, and former chief of staff of Hillary Clinton’s
2016 presidential campaign. Julia Ioffe, the Atlantic’s chief
Russiagate correspondent, 
promoted the
bot tracker as “a very cool tool.”

Unlike
PropOrNot, the ASD was sponsored by one of the most respected think
tanks in Washington, the 
German
Marshall Fund
,
which had been founded in 1972 to nurture the special relationship
between the US and what was then West Germany.

The
German Marshall Fund is substantially 
funded
by Western governments
,
and largely reflects their foreign-policy interests. Its top two
financial sponsors, at more than $1 million per year each, are the
U.S. government’s soft-power arm the U.S. Agency for International
Development (
USAID)
and the German Foreign Office (known in German as the Auswärtiges
Amt). The U.S. State Department also provides more than half a
million dollars per year, as do the German Ministry of Economic
Cooperation and Development and the foreign affairs ministries of
Sweden and Norway. It likewise receives at least a quarter of a
million dollars per year from NATO.


The
US government and NATO are top donors to the German Marshall Fund.

Though
the German Marshall Fund did not name the donors that specifically
sponsored its Alliance for Securing Democracy initiative, it hosts a
who’s who of bipartisan national-security hardliners on the
ASD’s 
advisory
council
,
providing the endeavor with the patina of credibility. They range
from neocon movement icon Bill Kristol to former Clinton foreign
policy advisor Jake Sullivan and ex-CIA director Michael Morell.

Jamie
Fly, a German Marshall Fund fellow and Asia specialist, emerged as
one of the most prolific promoters of the new Russian bot tracker in
the media. Together with Laura Rosenberger, a former foreign policy
aide to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign, Fly appeared in a series
of 
interviews and
co-authored several 
op-eds emphasizing
the need for a massive social media crackdown.

During
a March 2018
 interview
on C-Span
,
Fly complained that “Russian accounts” were “trying to promote
certain messages, amplify certain content, raise fringe views, pit
Americans against each other, and we need to deal with this ongoing
problem and find ways through the government, through tech companies,
through broader society to tackle this issue.”

Yet
few of the sites on PropOrNot’s blacklist, and none of the
alternative sites that were erased in the recent Facebook purge that
Fly and his colleagues take apparent credit for, were Russian
accounts. Perhaps the only infraction they could have been accused of
was publishing views that Fly and his cohorts saw as “fringe.”

What’s
more, the ASD has been forced to admit that the mass of Twitter
accounts it initially identified as “Russian bots” were not
necessarily bots — and may not have been Russian either.

I’m
Not Convinced on This Bot Thing”

A
November 2017
 investigation by
Max Blumenthal, a co-author of this article, found that the ASD’s
Hamilton 68 dashboard was the creation of “a collection of cranks,
counterterror retreads, online harassers and paranoiacs operating
with support from some of the most prominent figures operating within
the American national security apparatus.”

These
figures included the same George Washington University Center for
Cyber and Homeland Security fellows — Andrew Weisburd and Clint
Watts — that were cited as experts in the Washington Post’s
article promoting PropOrNot.

Weisburd,
who has been described as one of the brains behind the Hamilton 68
dashboard, once maintained a one-man, anti-Palestinian web monitoring
initiative that specialized in doxxing left-wing activists, Muslims
and anyone he considered “anti-American.” More recently, he has
taken to Twitter to spout off murderous and homophobic fantasies
about Glenn Greenwald, the editor of the Intercept — a publication
the ASD flagged without explanation as a vehicle for Russian
influence operations.

Watts,
for his part, has testified before Congress on several occasions
to 
call on
the government to “quell information rebellions” with censorious
measures including “nutritional labels” for online media. He has
received fawning publicity from corporate media and been rewarded
with a contributor role for NBC on the basis of his supposed
expertise in ferreting out Russian disinformation.

However, under
questioning
 during
a public event by Grayzone contributor Ilias Stathatos, Watts
admitted that substantial parts of his testimony were false, and
refused to provide evidence to support some of his most colorful
claims about malicious Russian bot activity.

In
a separate interview with 
Buzzfeed,
Watts appeared to completely disown the Hamilton 68 bot tracker as a
legitimate tool. “I’m not convinced on this bot thing,” Watts
confessed. He even called the narrative that he helped manufacture
“overdone,” and admitted that the accounts Hamilton 68 tracked
were not necessarily directed by Russian intelligence actors.

We
don’t even think they’re all commanded in Russia — at all. We
think some of them are legitimately passionate people that are just
really into promoting Russia,” Watts conceded.

But
these stunning admissions did little to slow the momentum of the
coming purge.

Enter
the Atlantic Council

In
his conversation with Sprague, the German Marshall Fund’s Fly
stated that he was working with the Atlantic Council in the campaign
to purge alternative media from social media platforms like Facebook.

The
Atlantic Council is another Washington-based think tank that serves
as a gathering point for neoconservatives and liberal
interventionists pushing military aggression around the globe. It
is 
funded by
NATO and 
repressive,
US-allied governments
 including
Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Turkey, as well as by Ukrainian oligarchs
like Victor Pynchuk.

This
May, Facebook
 announced a
partnership with the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research
Lab (DFRLab) to “identify, expose, and explain disinformation
during elections around the world.”

The
Atlantic Council’s DFRLab is notorious for its zealous
conflation of legitimate online dissent with illicit Russian
activity, embracing the same tactics as PropOrNot and the ASD.

Ben
Nimmo, a DFRLab fellow who has built his reputation on flushing out
online Kremlin influence networks, 
embarked on
an embarrassing witch hunt this year that saw him misidentify several
living, breathing individuals as Russian bots or Kremlin “influence
accounts.” Nimmo’s victims included 
Mariam
Susli
,
a well-known Syrian-Australian social media personality, the famed
Ukrainian concert pianist 
Valentina
Lisitsa
,
and a British pensioner named Ian Shilling.

In
an interview with Sky News, Shilling delivered a 
memorable
tirade
 against
his accusers. “I have no Kremlin contacts whatsoever; I do not know
any Russians, I have no contact with the Russian government or
anything to do with them,” he exclaimed. “I am an ordinary
British citizen who happens to do research on the current neocon wars
which are going on in Syria at this very moment.”

With
the latest Facebook and Twitter purges, ordinary citizens like
Shilling are being targeted in the open, and without apology. The
mass deletions of alternative media accounts illustrate how national
security hardliners from the German Marshall Fund and Atlantic
Council (and whoever was behind PropOrNot) have instrumentalized the
manufactured panic around Russian interference to generate public
support for a wider campaign of media censorship.

In
his conversation in Berlin with Sprague, Fly noted with apparent
approval that, “Trump is now pointing to Chinese interference in
the 2018 election.” As the mantra of foreign interference expands
to a new adversarial power, the clampdown on voices of dissent in
online media is almost certain to intensify.

As
Fly promised, “This is just the beginning.”


Jeb
Sprague
 is
a visiting faculty at the University of California, Santa
Barbara. He is the author of “Globalizing the Caribbean: Political
economy, social change, and the transnational capitalist class”
(Temple University Press, 2019), “Paramilitarism and the assault on
democracy in Haiti” (Monthly Review Press, 2012), and is the editor
of “Globalization and transnational capitalism in Asia and Oceania”
(Routledge, 2016). He is a co-founder of the Network for the Critical
Studies of Global Capitalism.

Max
Blumenthal
 is
an award-winning journalist and the author of books including
best-selling 
Republican
Gomorrah: Inside the Movement That Shattered the Party
Goliath:
Life and Loathing in Greater Israel
The
Fifty One Day War: Ruin and Resistance in Gaza
,
and The Management of Savagery, which will be published later this
year by Verso. He has also produced numerous print articles for an
array of publications, many video reports and several documentaries
including 
Je
Ne Suis Pas Charlie
 and
the forthcoming 
Killing
Gaza
.
Blumenthal founded the Grayzone Project in 2015 to shine a
journalistic light on America’s state of perpetual war and its
dangerous domestic repercussions.

By Max
Blumenthal
 and Jeb
Sprague 
Republished
with permission / 
Grayzone
Project
 / Report
a typo

=============================

* Zie o.a.: ‘Politico rapport bevestigt: Russiagate is een hoax

Zie ook:

Facebooks departement voor censuur: een hoognodige uitleg over een maatregel die alleen in een dictatuur thuishoort

Facebook gebruikte ‘fake news’ beschuldiging om de aandacht voor schandalen af te leiden

New York Times: eerste Israëlische inval in Gazastrook sinds 2014 >> fake news!

Noord-Koreaans ‘bedrog met nucleaire deal’ is fake news o.a. gebracht door de New York Times

Russiagate sprookje ondermijnt VS democratie en de midterm verkiezingen

Bolsonaro, de fascistische nieuwe president van Brazilië, werd volgens Avaaz en fake news brengers als de NYT gekozen door manipulatie via WhatsApp

Twitter weert waarheid: Paul Craig Roberts in de ban, Roberts >> de grote criticus van de illegale oorlogen die de VS voert

The US military’s vision for state censorship

Israël en VS werken samen in tegenwerken van critici op beleid t.a.v. Palestijnen

Facebook censureert de waarheid over Columbus en de verovering van de Amerika’s…….

Facebook censuur gestuurd door het westers militair-industrieel complex en de NAVO in het bijzonder……….

Why the Coordinated Alternative Media Purge Should Terrify Everyone‘ (Tyler Durden op Zero Hedge)

First They Came for Alex Jones — We Told You We Were Next — We Were‘ (Matt Agorist op The Free Thought Project)

CNN, de grote brenger van ‘fake news!!!’

Facebook en Twitter verwijderen nu volledige accounts………

Facebook (en Twitter) onderdrukt meningsvorming door het verwijderen van (echt) onafhankelijke media

Wie het nieuws controleert, controleert de wereld……

Facebook en Twitter verwijderen de eerlijke journalistiek en oprechte opinie >> censuur…..

Facebook verlaat ‘tranding news’ voor ‘brekend nieuws’ van 80 reguliere mediaorganen, ofwel nog meer ‘fake news…..’

Facebook komt met nieuwsshows van betrouwbare media als CNN en Fox News…. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Censuur op het internet met vliegende start in de VS, ‘het land van het vrije woord….’

Facebook en NAVO werken samen in censuur op niet welgevallig nieuws……

Facebook helpt Saoedi-Arabië: doodstraf door onthoofding van vrouw die het waagde kritiek te uiten…..

Aanval op alternatieve media ‘succesvol’: meer en meer sites worden van het net geweerd………

ThinkProgress eiste censuur van Facebook en werd inderdaad gecensureerd…. ha! ha! ha! ha!

VS staatscensuur op Facebook (ook in de EU)

Facebook stelt perstituee van New York Times aan als censuur-agent…… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Het echte Facebook schandaal: manipulatie van de gebruikers en gratis diensten voor eertijds presidentskandidaat Obama…….

Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook doneerde aan de politici die hem in de VS aan de tand voelden >> in het EU parlement maakte hij gebruik van megalomane EU politici…..

Facebook wil samen met door Saoedi-Arabië gesubsidieerde denktank censureren…. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Media Too Busy Defending John McCain to Report the News That Actually Affects You‘ Onder andere aandacht voor PRISM.

Westerse massa misleiding in aanloop naar WOIII……

VS gebruikt sociale media om ‘fake comment’ te verspreiden en de bevolking te hersenspoelen met leugens, ofwel ‘fake news….’

Eis een nee tegen censuur op het internet!‘ 

Facebook e.a. hebben lak aan AVG (GDPR), misbruik persoonsgegevens gaat gewoon door…….

Jeremy Corbyn wordt gedemoniseerd als antisemiet…….

VS gebruikt sociale media om ‘fake comment’ te verspreiden en de bevolking te hersenspoelen met leugens, ofwel ‘fake news….’

Facebook: verrijking van oliemaatschappijen en andere grote bedrijven, plus wereldwijde corruptie…….

Rusland krijgt alweer de schuld van hacken, nu van oplichters Symantec en Facebook……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Facebook Purges Independent Media for “Political Disinformation”

Facebook Blocks Links to Free Speech Competitor ‘Minds’

Facebook censuur gestuurd door het westers militair-industrieel complex en de NAVO in het bijzonder……….

Derrick
Broze betoogt in het artikel dat hieronder is opgenomen, dat
Facebooks censuur wordt 

gestuurd door het westers
militair-industrieel complex. Zo is de zogenaamd wetenschappelijke
site ‘PropOr Not’, dat zich in de praktijk bezighoudt met het brengen
van anti-Russische propaganda, onderdeel van The Interpreter en dat
is op haar beurt onderdeel van Broadcasting Board of Governors,
een organisatie die VS propaganda over de wereld verspreid met een
stuk of zes mediaorganen zoals ‘Voice of America’ (VOA).


Ook
de Atlantic Council is een lobbyorgaan van het militair-industrieel
complex, waar de NAVO een dikke vinger in de smerige pap heeft…….

Het artikel van Broze komt van zijn website The Conscious Resistance, ik nam het over van Anti-Media:


The
Facebook Purge of Independent Media: What You’re Not Being Told


Afbeeldingsresultaat voor The Facebook Purge of Independent Media: What You’re Not Being Told

October
15, 2018 at 11:26 am

Written
by 
Derrick
Broze

Victims
of Facebook’s most recent purge should not forget the connections
between the social media giant and the Western Military-Industrial
Complex.

(CR— On
Thursday, Facebook announced they were unpublishing, or purging, over
500 pages and 200 accounts who are accused of spreading political
spam. Several of these pages and writers were also removed from
Twitter on the same day.

Today,
we’re removing 559 Pages and 251 accounts that have consistently
broken our rules against spam and coordinated inauthentic
behavior,” 
Facebook
stated in a blog post
. Facebook
states that the people behind this alleged spam “create networks of
Pages using fake accounts or multiple accounts with the same names”
and “post the same clickbait posts in dozens of Facebook Groups”.

Essentially,
Facebook is accusing these pages of writing articles related to
politics and then using the social media platform to…. post the
articles in as many places as possible to reach as many people as
possible. Hardly dangerous or scary stuff. However, these actions are
in violation of Facebook’s Terms of Service. Facebook also accused
the pages and accounts of using their fake accounts to generate fake
likes and shares which may artificially inflate their reach and
mislead people about their popularity. According to Facebook, “This
activity goes against what people expect on Facebook, and it violates
our policies against spam.”

Facebook
also stated that “sensational political content” from across the
political spectrum is being used to “build an audience and drive
traffic to their websites, earning money for every visitor to the
site”. Again, this does not qualify as dangerous or threatening
activity. This is a standard practice for most media outlets who are
trying to earn revenue to pay writers, editors, social media
managers, etc. It is true that some of the pages on this list (see
below for a current list) have indeed used clickbait headlines or
even posts that are likely untrue. However, the list also includes
legitimate independent news outlets such as The Anti Media, The Free
Thought Project, Cop Block, and Police the Police, which focused on
countering mainstream and establishment narratives related to
politics and police.

Facebook’s
statement that the pages and accounts were “often indistinguishable
from legitimate political debate” begs the question – which pages
and accounts are “legitimate political debate”? And by which
metric does Facebook decide what counts as legitimate? These
questions are yet to be answered. Perhaps with time Facebook will
come clean about their process, but in the meantime it’s important
to reflect on Facebook’s recent partnership with the Atlantic
Council and attempts to stifle the flow of information in the name of
fighting “fake news”.

The
fight against Fake News started immediately following the election of
Donald Trump. In November 2016, Merrimack College associate professor
Melissa Zimdars posted a public Google document titled, “False,
Misleading, Clickbait-y, and/or Satirical ‘News’ Sources” which
went viral after being reported on by most corporate mainstream
outlets. This list lumped in some of the same outlets which fell
victim to Facebook’s most recent purge with actual fake news
websites which are well known among the indie and alt media industry.
Within a matter of weeks, a new list appeared online from an
organization calling itself PropOrNot, an allegedly independent group
of researchers trying to find the truth about the dissemination of
Russian propaganda and fake news. This list also contained names of
prominent independent media outlets like Anti-Media, The Corbett
Report, MintPress News, and many others.

It
was this combination of the Zimdars list and the PropOrNot list which
had the immediate effect of placing a target on the vast majority of
independent journalists and outlets who were now being accused of
directly or indirectly conspiring with the Russians. Websites and
social media pages for these outlets began suffering a drastic
reduction in reach and interaction with their audiences and many
websites lost access to Google advertising money due to these false
associations.

The
problem is that the majority of the mainstream media unquestionably
reported on and repeated the claims made by these two lists without
any attempt at investigative work. For example, PropOrNot claims they
are “completely independent” and “nonpartisan” because they
are not funded by anyone and have no formal institutional
affiliations or political connections.

They
say the must remain anonymous for now because they are a “are
civilian Davids taking on a state-backed adversary Goliath”.
However, a report by Russian news outlet Sputnik (yes, I am aware
many readers will automatically scream, “Fake news!”, but I
encourage you to read on.) challenges the alleged unbiased nature of
PropOrNot.


Sputnik
reports
 that
George Eliason, a Ukraine-based investigative journalist, authored an
expose of PropOrNot in which he argued the organization was
a “deep-state hitjob on alternative news outlets”.

So
when you’re looking at PropOrNot, it’s just basic
investigative techniques. Who are they — that’s the first
thing you need to know,” Eliason told Sputnik. “So you look
them up on the web and you find nothing. I went to their
website and did a basic scan, and 
the
funny thing about PropOrNot is that to get into their
website, you need to be logged into the dashboard of The
Interpreter magazine.”


So
who runs The Interpreter?

Eliason
states that “The Interpreter is also overseen by the the
Broadcasting Board of Governors, who run Voice of America
and half a dozen other US propaganda projects across the globe”.

In
addition, “The Interpreter is a product of the Atlantic
Council committee, who is basically setting our foreign policy right
now in Eastern Europe and Russia,” Eliason stated. “They’re
an NGO, they work outside the government, and they work with the
Ukrainian diaspora. They actually have a signed contract with the
diaspora — you can view them signing it.”


The
important takeaway from this report is that only 4 months later, in
May 2018, Facebook 
announced
a new partnership with the Atlantic Council –
 the
same think tank tied to PropOrNot – which officially claims to
provide a forum for international political, business, and
intellectual leaders. Facebook said the partnership is aimed at
preventing  the social media tool from “being abused during
elections.” 
The
press release
 promoted
Facebook’s efforts to fight fake news by using artificial
intelligence, as well as working with outside experts and
governments.

The
Atlantic Council of the United States was established in 1961 to
bolster support for international relations. Although not officially
connected to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the Atlantic
Council has spent decades promoting causes and issues which are
beneficial to NATO member states. In addition, The Atlantic Council
is a member of the Atlantic Treaty Organization, an umbrella
organization which “acts as a network facilitator in the
Euro-Atlantic and beyond.” The ATA* works similarly to the Atlantic
Council, bringing together political leaders, academics, military
officials, journalists and diplomats to promote values that are
favorable to the NATO member states. Officially, ATA is independent
of NATO, but the line between the two is razor thin.

Essentially,
the Atlantic Council is a think tank which can offer companies or
nation states access to military officials, politicians, journalists,
diplomats, etc. to help them develop a plan to implement their
strategy or vision. These strategies often involve getting NATO
governments or industry insiders to make decisions they might not
have made without a visit from the Atlantic Council team. This allows
individuals or nations to push forth their ideas under the cover of
hiring what appears to be a public relations agency but is actually
selling access to high-profile individuals with power to affect
public policy. Indeed, everyone from George H.W. Bush to Bill Clinton
to the family of international agent of disorder Zbigniew Brzezinski
have spoken at or attended council events.

The
list of financial supporters reads like a who’s-who of think tanks
and Non-Governmental Organizations. The Atlantic Council receives
funding from the Brookings Institution, Carnegie Endowment, Cato
Institute, Council on Foreign Relations, and the Rand Corporation, to
name a few. In addition, various members of the Military-Industrial
Complex are benefactors of the Atlantic Council, including Huntington
Ingalls, the United States’ sole maker of aircraft carriers;
Airbus, the plane manufacturer; Lockheed Martin, the shipbuilder and
aviation company; and Raytheon, which makes missile systems. All of
the companies have contracts with the U.S.

Department
of Defense and offer financial support to the Atlantic Council. The
Council also receives support from Chevron and the Thomson Reuters
Foundation. Finally, the Atlantic Council receives direct financial
support from the U.S. Departments of the Air Force, Army, Navy and
Energy and from the U.S. Mission to NATO.

Is
it possible Facebook is acting under the direction of their partners
at the Atlantic Council to suppress anti-war, anti-establishment
voices three weeks before the U.S. midterm elections? It is
absolutely possible and likely.

We
should also remember this is not the first time Facebook has deleted
accounts which operate outside the mainstream corporate media. In
August, 
Facebook
deleted accounts 
containing
“fringe or holistic medicine”, including Just Natural Medicine (1
million followers), Natural Cures Not Medicine (2.3 million
followers), and People’s Awakening (3.6 million followers). The
same month Facebook and Twitter deleted pages they claimed
were 
connected
to Iran and Russia
.

This
entire ongoing attack of independent media and free thought stemmed
from the establishment media’s nonstop coverage of what has become
known as fake news. Anyone and everyone who has countered the
establishment narrative of endless war, a growing surveillance and
police state, and an allegedly growing divide in American politics,
has been labeled a Russian bot, accomplice, or useful idiot. One way
or another, the message is clear: stand against the establishment and
you will be labeled an enemy of the state.

By
spreading the fake news meme the elitists behind the American power
centers are able to attack  growing independent media icons by
painting them as propagators of false Russian propaganda. The media
is also using this fake news meme and Russian prop to accuse Trump of
being an illegitimate president, further playing into the “Trump is
an outsider” narrative. All of this is being done with the goal of
keeping the domestic front as divided as possible while selling the
brainwashed masses into another war. Coincidentally, all of this
non-sense is taking place while the corporate media spreads lies
about Syria and Russia.

It’s
more important than ever to remain level headed and use critical
thinking. It’s never been more important to follow the pages that
were purged directly from their websites. See the full list below and
decide which outlets you want to continue to support in the
information war.


Afbeeldingsresultaat voor The Facebook Purge of Independent Media: What You’re Not Being Told

List
of pages taken down on Thursday October 11, 2018:

The
Free Thought Project – 3.1 million fans
The Anti-Media – 2.1
million fans
Police the Police – 1.9 million fans
Cop Block –
1.7 million fans
Filming Cops – 1.4 million fans
Rachel
Blevins – 69,000 fans
V is For Voluntary – 160,000 fans
End
the War on Drugs – 460,000 fans
Mass Report – 500,000 fans
Get
Involved, You Live Here – 360,000 fans
Press for Truth –
350,000 fans
Political Junkie News Media – 300,000 fans
Murica
Today – 180,000 fans
Choice & Truth – 2.9 million fans
You
won’t see this on TV – 172,000 fans
Modern Slavery Hilarious
Vines – 129,000 fans
Fuck the Government – 168,000 fans
Punk
Rock Libertarians – 190,000 fans
Reverb Press – 700,000
fans
Nation In Distress – 3.2 million fans
Free Your Mind
Conference – 75,000 fans
Right Wing News – 3.6 million
fans
Reasonable People United
Psychologic Anarchist
Policing
the Police
Cop Logic
Legalizing Cannabis
Hemp
End the
Drug War
Anonymous News

By Derrick
Broze
 / Republished
with permission / 
Conscious
Resistance
 / Report
a typo

* ATA zou in dit geval moeten staan voor Atlantic Treaty Association, vrees dat hier een spelfout werd gemaakt, ATA werkt vanuit Roemenië en is een organisatie die VS propaganda steunt, echter gezien niet één verdere verwijzing, vraag ik me af of deze organisatie wordt bedoeld.

Zie ook:

Robert Epstein: Google en Facebook corrumperen de politiek en manipuleren de presidentsverkiezingen‘ 

Facebook staat valse informatie toe tijdens de (voor-) verkiezingen van het presidentschap in de VS

Facebook gebruikte ‘fake news’ beschuldiging om de aandacht voor schandalen af te leiden

New York Times: eerste Israëlische inval in Gazastrook sinds 2014 >> fake news!

Noord-Koreaans ‘bedrog met nucleaire deal’ is fake news o.a. gebracht door de New York Times

‘Fake News’ misbruikt door dictaturen en de reguliere (massa-) media

Russiagate sprookje ondermijnt VS democratie en de midterm verkiezingen

Bolsonaro, de fascistische nieuwe president van Brazilië, werd volgens Avaaz en fake news brengers als de NYT gekozen door manipulatie via WhatsApp

Twitter weert waarheid: Paul Craig Roberts in de ban, Roberts >> de grote criticus van de illegale oorlogen die de VS voert

Facebooks zuivering van de alternatieve (nieuws) media staat nog in de kinderschoenen

Politico rapport bevestigt: Russiagate is een hoax

The US military’s vision for state censorship

Israël en VS werken samen in tegenwerken van critici op beleid t.a.v. Palestijnen

Facebook censureert de waarheid over Columbus en de verovering van de Amerika’s…….

Why the Coordinated Alternative Media Purge Should Terrify Everyone‘ (Tyler Durden op Zero Hedge)

First They Came for Alex Jones — We Told You We Were Next — We Were‘ (Matt Agorist op The Free Thought Project)

Facebook en Twitter verwijderen nu volledige accounts………


9/11 forum geblokkeerd, de waarheid mag niet gezegd worden……..


CNN, de grote brenger van ‘fake news!!!’


Facebook (en Twitter) onderdrukt meningsvorming door het verwijderen van (echt) onafhankelijke media

Wie het nieuws controleert, controleert de wereld……

Facebook en Twitter verwijderen de eerlijke journalistiek en oprechte opinie >> censuur…..

Facebook verlaat ‘tranding news’ voor ‘brekend nieuws’ van 80 reguliere mediaorganen, ofwel nog meer ‘fake news…..’

Facebook komt met nieuwsshows van betrouwbare media als CNN en Fox News…. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Censuur op het internet met vliegende start in de VS, ‘het land van het vrije woord….’

Facebook en NAVO werken samen in censuur op niet welgevallig nieuws……

Facebook helpt Saoedi-Arabië: doodstraf door onthoofding van vrouw die het waagde kritiek te uiten…..

Aanval op alternatieve media ‘succesvol’: meer en meer sites worden van het net geweerd………

ThinkProgress eiste censuur van Facebook en werd inderdaad gecensureerd…. ha! ha! ha! ha!

VS staatscensuur op Facebook (ook in de EU)

Facebook stelt perstituee van New York Times aan als censuur-agent…… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Het echte Facebook schandaal: manipulatie van de gebruikers en gratis diensten voor eertijds presidentskandidaat Obama…….

Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook doneerde aan de politici die hem in de VS aan de tand voelden >> in het EU parlement maakte hij gebruik van megalomane EU politici…..

Facebook wil samen met door Saoedi-Arabië gesubsidieerde denktank censureren…. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Media Too Busy Defending John McCain to Report the News That Actually Affects You‘ Onder andere aandacht voor PRISM.

Westerse massa misleiding in aanloop naar WOIII……

VS gebruikt sociale media om ‘fake comment’ te verspreiden en de bevolking te hersenspoelen met leugens, ofwel ‘fake news….’

Eis een nee tegen censuur op het internet!‘ 

Facebook e.a. hebben lak aan AVG (GDPR), misbruik persoonsgegevens gaat gewoon door…….

Jeremy Corbyn wordt gedemoniseerd als antisemiet…….

VS gebruikt sociale media om ‘fake comment’ te verspreiden en de bevolking te hersenspoelen met leugens, ofwel ‘fake news….’

Facebook: verrijking van oliemaatschappijen en andere grote bedrijven, plus wereldwijde corruptie…….

Rusland krijgt alweer de schuld van hacken, nu van oplichters Symantec en Facebook……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Facebook Purges Independent Media for “Political Disinformation”

Facebook Blocks Links to Free Speech Competitor ‘Minds’

‘Fake News’ hysterie willens en wetens gelanceerd om sociale media tot zwijgen te brengen, Rusland te demoniseren en daarmee de waarheid te verbergen……..

‘Wat je niet verteld wordt over fake news en Russische propaganda’, zo luidt de titel boven een artikel van Clive Murphy op de ‘The Mind Unleashed’.

In dit artikel o.a. aandacht voor journalist Sharyl Attkisson, die zich afvroeg of ‘fake news’ (nepnieuws in de labels direct onder dit bericht) echt is, of zelf een gefabriceerde term is. Ofwel of ‘fake news’ een vehikel is waarmee men terechte kritiek op de berichtgeving van de reguliere (massa-) media en het brengen van artikelen ‘met een iets andere kijk op de waarheid’ (ofwel veelal waarachtig nieuws), als niet ter zake doend en als onzin afschildert……

Zoals de regelmatige lezer van dit blog weet, ben ik overtuigd van het laatste: de term ‘fake news’ is verzonnen om sociale media, die de waarheid blootleggen, de mond te snoeren……

Lees en oordeel zelf:

What
You’re Not Being Told About Fake News and Russian Propaganda

February
19, 2018 at 7:03 am

Written
by 
The
Mind Unleashed

(TMU) — “Is
‘fake news’ real?”
 asked
investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson during a 
Tedx
talk
 this
month — posing the paradoxical question in the context of its
explosion in popularity during the 2016 presidential election — or
is the term, 
fake
news
,
itself, a fabrication?

In
its absurd extreme, identifiably fake news appears on supermarket
shelves as tabloid magazines, in ‘reports’ on human births of
alien hybrid babies and other blatant fabrications; while its more
pernicious iteration, issued by traditional pillars of journalism —
such as the New York Times and Washington
Post
, among many others — manifests in reports citing
unsubstantiated sources and unnamed ‘officials,’ and often favors
corporate sponsors as well as the political establishment.

Fake
news
 isn’t new to the media landscape, in other words, but
the catchphrase, as a descriptor, is.

Thus,
what if fake news — peddled to the public as a pressing problem in
need of solution — is itself a deception,
intentionally constructed to silence legitimate critique, opposing
viewpoints, and dissent?

Attkisson,
who surmised the abrupt entrée of an artificial problem must have
had assistance, investigated the origins of the phrase, ‘fake
news,’ and its employment as accusation and insinuation, whether or
not accompanied by substantiating evidence. And she was frighteningly
on point.

What
if the whole anti-fake news campaign was an effort on somebody’s
part to keep us from seeing or believing certain websites and stories
by controversializing them or labeling them as fake news?”
 the
seasoned journalist and winner of the Edward R. Murrow award for
investigative reporting asks.

Weighing
the evidence, timeline, and money trail Attkisson discovered —
coupled with the resulting heavy-handed crackdown on social media and
video-sharing platforms, as well as by search engines and
advertisers, on the fictitious false information crisis — not only
does it seem likely the term was premeditated and unleashed as a
propaganda device, but as a loaded weapon inherently threatening to
the future of the free press as protectively enshrined in the First
Amendment.

With
decades of experience, Attkisson’s hunch — that the specific term
‘fake news’ did not spread like acrid wildfire of its own
volition — found factual corroboration.

In
mid-September 2016, the nonprofit group, First Draft — funded in
part, 
according
to
 an
archive of the site, by grants from the “
John
S. and James L. Knight Foundation, 
Open
Society Foundation
 and
the Ford Foundation”
 —
announced its mission “
to
tackle malicious hoaxes and fake news reports.”

First
Draft — a project of the Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and
Public Policy at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of
Government — uses research-based methods to fight mis- and
disinformation online. Additionally, it provides practical and
ethical guidance in how to find, verify and publish content sourced
from the social web,”
 the
site’s About section 
states.

The
goal was supposedly to separate wheat from chaff,”
 Attkisson
explains, “to
prevent unproven conspiracy talk from figuring prominently in
internet searches. To relegate today’s version of the alien baby
story to a special internet oblivion.”

However
innocuous-sounding that agenda, just one month passed before First
Draft’s battle against fake news found a megaphone in the
president, as Obama abruptly “
insisted in
a speech that he too thought somebody needed to step in and curate
information of this wild, wild west media environment,”
 she
notes.

But
there 
hadn’t been
a ruckus, much less a few lone voices, griping about fake news as an
issue of any import — or even complaining, at all.

Nobody
in the public had been clamoring for any such thing,”
 Attkisson
continues, “yet,
suddenly, the topic of fake news dominates headlines on a daily
basis. It’s as if the media had been given its marching orders.

Fake
news, they insisted, was an imminent threat to American Democracy.”

Aware “few
themes arise”
 in
the mass media environment “
organically,” the
seasoned investigator followed the money to First Draft’s funders —
to discern which interested parties might be backing the rally
against fake news. Google, in fact, financed the group “
around
the start of the election cycle”
 —
Google, whose parent company Alphabet’s CEO 
Eric
Schmidt
 both
acted as adviser and multi-million-dollar donor to the presidential
campaign of Hillary Clinton.

Mirroring
Obama’s lament, Clinton soon championed quashing fake news as a
priority — and her “surrogate, David Brock of Media
Matters, privately told donors he was the one who convinced Facebook
to join the effort,”
 she adds.

I’m
not the only one who thought that the whole thing smacked of the
roll-out of a propaganda campaign.”

Indeed,
the 
nascent fake
news allegation almost exclusively centered around
conservative-leaning outlets, journalists, and articles perceived as
favoring then-candidate Trump — and repeatedly alongside
allegations those media entities were acting directly, indirectly, or
haplessly at the behest of the Russian government — while the
majority of the mud-slinging was 
levied without
proof or the flimsiest of supporting evidence.

To
wit, a succession of pieces published by mass media dispensed with
the indispensable journalistic protocols of source- and fact-checking
— then shied away from accepting responsibility for the incendiary
and damaging claims once a furious backlash ensued.

Although
Attkisson did not mention them specifically in the roughly ten-minute
Tedx talk at the University of Nevada, two lists published at the
height of the Fake News Scare — both of which were either
republished or alluded and linked to by multiple corporate outlets —
came into public purview under highly suspect circumstances, each
lending albeit indirect credence to the hypothesis a propaganda
crusade was underway.

On
November 13, 2016, Merrimack College associate professor Melissa
Zimdars out of the blue made public a Google document entitled,
“False, Misleading, Clickbait-y, and/or Satirical ‘News’
Sources,” she later described as essentially a worksheet intended
for colleagues and students to offer one another tips for avoiding
disseminating fake news.

So
… I posted it to Facebook to my friends, you know, ‘Hey, media
and communication people, if you think of other examples you come
across,’”
 she
explained of the list’s creation to 
USA
Today College
 in
an 
interview, “and
so many of them sent me Facebook messages or comments and emails and
I looked through them or through some of the people sent me blogs or
other sources.”

Admittedly,
without vetting whether or not each (or even a few) of the sites
conjured from that Facebook post deserved a place on the inflammatory
list, Zimdars committed the precise journalistic fraud putatively
motivating its formation in the first place — as did the 
Los
Angeles Times
,
whose 
piece,

Want
to keep fake news out of your newsfeed? College professor creates
list of sites to avoid,” let loose the unverified, unchecked, and
unauthenticated aggregation, with its purely subjective guidelines,
onto a populace stirred to frenzy over fake news, to expectedly viral
results.

Critics
and listees — many of which cogently included established if
smaller conservative and pro-Trump outlets, as well as those covering
the deluge of corruption allegations spawned from a series of leaks
against then-candidate Clinton, John Podesta, and the Democratic
National Committee — lambasted Zimdars, the Times, and other
propagators for failing the integrity litmus test. Slapped with
requests for removal and a firestorm of fury, Zimdars temporarily
revoked public access to the contentious list with vows to edit and
update information as appropriate, and authored an 
editorial
defense
,
appearing in the 
Post on
November 18, titled, “My ‘fake news list’ went viral. But
made-up stories are only part of the problem.”

Despite
the mayhem and arguable damage it caused to myriad legitimate sources
listed among the obvious disinformation outlets, Zimdars’ list is
once again open to the public — on 
Google Docs.

After
having established itself as a 
defender of
the associate professor’s worksheet, the 
Washington
Post
 took
the 
L.A.
Times

lead, issuing an article on November 24 almost wholly pertaining to a
list it failed to embed or even link — only the name of the
problematic organization, PropOrNot, provided clues for readers
dedicated enough to search on their own. And they did in droves.

But
the Post’s reckless foray into tabloidesque journalism
— perhaps wary of negative perception beginning to foment against
the anti-fake news brigade — crossed several lines demarcating
standards of journalism; and weaved another narrative of equally
dubious stature into the already unraveling anti-disinformation war:
Russia.

Russian
propaganda effort helped spread ‘fake news’ during election,
experts say,” the outlet 
proclaimed
in the title
 for
the article — whose un-accompanying blacklist pegged hundreds of
independent, 
conservative,
pro-Bernie Sanders, pro-Trump, and even left-leaning and
award-winning sites as suddenly verboten due to direct or indirect
Russian influence, or for acting as Russia’s “
useful
idiots”
 —
all while vocally preserving the anonymity of the “
four
sets of researchers”
 responsible.
Among them, PropOrNot.

The
flood of ‘fake news’ this election season got support from a
sophisticated Russian propaganda campaign that created and spread
misleading articles online with the goal of punishing Democrat
Hillary Clinton, helping Republican Donald Trump and undermining
faith in American democracy, say independent researchers who tracked
the operation,”
 the
piece’s lede 
contends.

But,
devoid named sources to question, transparency of methodologies, nor
any other potentially mitigating factors which would have allowed
independent verification contained in the original article, outrage
this time included the Post’s competition.

In
fact, several organizations listed as ‘allies’ by PropOrNot
immediately disavowed the claim. Eliot Higgins of research-focused
Bellingcat, one of several entities named as such, 
tweeted
that prior to the Post’s article, he had never heard of PropOrNot —
incidentally indicating a lack of contact by reporters from the media
organization — and, further, he “
never
gave permission to them to call Bellingcat ‘allies.’”

Fortune’s
Mathew Ingram penned an incredulous 
response,
entitled, “No, Russian Agents Are Not

Behind
Every Piece of Fake News You See.” Effectively destroying every
facet of the Post’s anathema piece, Ingram points out there
is “
also
little data available on the PropOrNot report, which describes a
network of 200 sites who it says are ‘routine peddlers of Russian
propaganda,’ which have what it calls a ‘combined audience of 15
million Americans.’ How is that audience measured? We don’t know.
Stories promoted by this network were shared 213 million times, it
says. How do we know this? That’s unclear.”

Ultimately
forced into addressing the resulting chaos, the 
Washington
Post
 article eventually
bore a note from the editor — not a retraction — asserting [with
emphasis added],

The
Washington Post on Nov. 24 published a story on the work of four sets
of researchers who have examined 
what
they say are Russian propaganda efforts to undermine American
democracy and interests
.
One of them was PropOrNot, a group that 
insists
on public anonymity
,
which issued a report identifying more than 200 websites that, in its
view, wittingly or unwittingly published or echoed Russian
propaganda. A number of those sites have objected to being included
on PropOrNot’s list, and some of the sites, as well as others not
on the list, have publicly challenged the group’s methodology and
conclusions. 
The
Post, which did not name any of the sites, does not itself vouch for
the validity of PropOrNot’s findings regarding any individual media
outlet, nor did the article purport to do so.
 Since
publication of The Post’s story, PropOrNot has removed some sites
from its list.”

To
reiterate, the Post did not retract the article abruptly conflating
fake news with Russian propaganda — regardless the brazen if
planned distancing of itself from the content therein — and has
never divulged its justification for publishing such threadbare work,
nor for allowing the empty allegations to remain available for the
world to read online in perpetuity.

On
January 8, 2017, amid continued outrage over specious and vapid fake
news and Russian propaganda accusations, 
Washington
Post
 columnist
Margaret Sullivan declared the entirety of the outlet’s relentless
anti-fake news jihad null, titling an 
article,
“It’s time to retire the tainted term ‘fake news,’”
positing the term’s mere monthslong duration may have served a
purpose at its advent, but “
its
meaning already is lost.”

Attkisson
notably emphasizes, however, the term never imparted a steel
definition nor universally agreed-upon guidelines delineating
precisely what it constitutes. That ambiguity disputably explains
placing the term front and center in a propaganda campaign — as it
is sharply suggested by Attkisson’s funding investigation of First
Draft with bulk of the aforementioned body of evidence — for doubt
before persuasion wields power.

For
its irresponsible reporting of the unsubstantiated blacklist, 
false
claims
 Russia
had 
hacked into
Vermont’s power grid, and all-out push to — for all intents and
purposes — vilify or discredit opposing but legitimate viewpoints,
the 
Washington
Post
 and
its 
controversial owner Jeff
Bezos
,
also CEO of 
Amazon,
garnered praise from failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton,
who professed without a hint of irony to an audience May 31, 2017, at
the annual Code Conference, as 
quoted
by
 CNBC,

I
think Jeff Bezos saved The Washington Post. But newspapers, like the
Post, the Journal, the Times, others — still drive news. … It was
a very good use of his financial resources. Because now we have a
very good newspaper again operating in Washington, and driving news
elsewhere.”

All
bold tit-for-tat back-patting aside, Clinton’s adoration for an
ostensive news organization, which  displayed an egregious lack
of journalistic standards on several occasions might be only telling,
were the audacious effort to mute dissenting and critical voices —
who had reported factually on damning evidence of layers of
corruption plaguing the former secretary of state’s campaign,
officials, and party as divulged by Wikileaks — not also tandemly
gaining momentum.

It
has been theorized the work of journalists not employed by
traditional, corporate mass media organizations had — in wading
through the vitriol of election season to report the avalanche of
information dumped in leaks and pivotal to outcome, yet ignored by
mass media — assisted in stoking rage against the establishment and
was responsible for the concurrent astronomical success of the
Sanders campaign, to the detriment and consternation of Clinton.

Whether
or not that hypothesis holds weight, that responsible reporting
picked up mainstream’s slack, as the big-name outlets instead
trained their audiences’ attentions on questioning Wikileaks,
whistleblowers, and similar diversions. In short, the widely-varied
body of independent media became essential for the dissemination of
accurate information. But that vitality, under the vacuous premise of
combating fake news, is being strangled by oppressive social
media 
algorithms,
yanked 
advertising and
sponsor dollars, and other tactics perhaps comprising the truer
imminent threat to vestiges of democracy: censorship,
through 
suppression and omission,
of a free press.

This
debilitating loss — the neutering of media still upholding its duty
to question government and report facts for their own sake — to a
concerted effort to solve the manufactured fake news problem would be
irrevocable tragedy.

Attkisson
— a 
noted dissenting
voice, 
critical of
lapdog media, herself — stopped short of a definitive conclusion
regarding a coordinated propaganda campaign, warning,

What
you need to remember is that when interests are working this hard to
shape your opinion, 
their
true goal might
just be to add another layer between you and the truth.”

By Clive
Murphy
 /
Republished with permission / 
The
Mind Unleashed
 / Report
a typo

=================================

Zie ook: ‘VS begint ‘troll farm’, alsof Hollywood en de massamedia al niet genoeg VS propaganda maken……….

       en: ‘Russian Roulette: The Inside Story of Putin’s War on America and the Election of Donald Trump‘ (artikel in Nederlands)

        en: ‘BBC World Service en BNR met ‘fake news’ over Ghouta……..

        en: ‘Syrische nonnen spreken zich uit tegen de oorlogspropaganda van westerse mogendheden en de reguliere westerse (massa-) media

        en: ‘Massamedia VS vergeven van CIA ‘veteranen’, alsof die media nog niet genoeg ‘fake news’ ofwel leugens brengen……..

       en: ‘Russiagate, of: hoe de media u belazeren met verhalen over Russische bemoeienis met de VS presidentsverkiezingen……..‘ 

       en: Volkskrant en Nieuwsuur Fake News over ‘Russische hacks…..’

       en: ‘Fake News van CNN: ‘American Sniper gedood in Syrie….’ ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

      en: ‘BBC publieksmanipulatie via het nieuws: Rusland steunt de slechteriken……‘ (met daaronder meerdere links naar BBC propaganda berichten, dan wel berichten over die propaganda)

       en: ‘FBI, de spin in het Russiagate web……..

       en: ‘Anti-Russische-Putin propaganda op Radio1, ofwel Godfroid uit de bocht met 10 km/u……..

       en: ‘BBC gaat met stafleden scholen af in de strijd tegen ‘fake news…’ ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

       en: ‘Trump administratie manipuleert de bevolking middels ‘fake news’ richting oorlog met Iran……………..

       en: ‘RT America één van de eerste slachtoffers in een heksenjacht op westerse alternatieve media en nadenkend links……

       en: ‘Ollongren gesteund door Thomas Boesgaard (AD), ‘Rusland verpakt het nepnieuws gekoppeld aan echt nieuws…..’ Oei!!‘ (ja ook deze D66 plork gaat plat op de bek!)

       en: ‘Syrië: Vlaamse pater roept op niet langer de westerse anti-Syrië propaganda te geloven!

       en: ‘Kajsa Ollongren (D66 vicepremier): Nederland staat in het vizier van Russische inlichtingendiensten……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

       en: ‘Ollongren (D66 minister) schiet een levensgrote bok met fake news show

       en: ‘‘Russiagate’ een verhaal van a t/m z westers ‘fake news…..’

       en: ‘Russiagate, of: hoe de media u belazeren met verhalen over Russische bemoeienis met de VS presidentsverkiezingen……..‘ 

       en: ‘‘Russiagate’ een complot van CIA, FBI, Hillary Clinton en het DNC………..

       en: ‘Russische ‘hacks’ door deskundigen nogmaals als fake news doorgeprikt >> Intel Vets Challenge ‘Russia Hack’ Evidence

       en: Publicly Available Evidence Doesn’t Support Russian Gov Hacking of 2016 Election

       en: ‘MSM Create #Fakenews Storm As Rebel Aleppo Vanishes

       en: ‘‘BBC Propaganda’ ‘Ken Loach just proved beyond doubt that the BBC is brainwashing the British public’‘ [VIDEO] 

      en: ‘Fallujah en Aleppo, twee belegerde steden, een opvallend verschil in berichtgeving door de reguliere media………

       en: ‘Extracting Aleppo from the Propaganda: Interviewwith Eva Bartlett, an independent western journalists covering the horrific conflict in Syria‘. (van Information Clearing House, inclusief mogelijkheid tot vertaling)

      en: ‘CIA Chief Admits the Agency’s Role in the Syrian War‘ (de bloedige rol wel te verstaan…..) (een artikel met mogelijkheid tot vertaling)

        en: ‘Former UK Ambassador to Syria Debunks Aleppo Propaganda‘ (met mogelijkheid tot vertaling

       en: ‘Aleppo, de propagandaslag o.a. middels grove leugens in de reguliere westerse media en politiek………..

    en: ‘Iraakse strijdmacht gaf grif toe dat tot hun orders voor West-Mosul ook het vermoorden van vrouwen en kinderen behoorde……..

       en: ‘Raqqa >> BBC World Service en ‘onafhankelijke journalistiek’: ‘Er zijn veel burgers omgekomen bij de strijd in de straten in Raqqa……..’

      en: ‘Massamedium CBS (VS) tegen reality check. Logisch wel, gezien de hoeveelheid fake news op die zender…..


    en: ‘SOHR, het orgaan dat door de reguliere media wordt aangehaald i.z. Syrië, is gevestigd in Coventry


     en: ‘De Russiagate samenzweringstheorie dient de machthebbers……… 

Mijn excuus voor de belabberde weergave.