Who Watches The Watchers - Fake News Label Censoring Alternative Viewpoints
By Tony Cartalucci/New Eastern Outlook June 14, 2017 Share this article:
With a name like the "National Democratic Institute" (NDI) one
might expect the US State Department-funded, corporate-financier chaired
front to be the premier proponent of freedom and democracy worldwide.
And
although it poses as such, it does precisely the opposite. It uses
principles like free speech, democracy, press freedom, and human rights
as a facade behind which it carries out a politically motivated agenda
on behalf of the special interests that fund and direct its activities.
In
a recent Tweet, NDI linked to a New York Times article titled, "In
Europe's Election Season, Tech Vies to Fight Fake News." It claimed in
the Tweet that the article featured:
A look at some of the projects aiming to use automated algorithms to identify and combat fake news.
The
article itself though, reveals nothing short of a global effort by US
tech-giants Google and Facebook, in collaboration with the Western
media, to censor any and all media that fails to align with
Western-dominated narratives.
The article itself claims:
The
French electorate heads to the polls in the second round of
presidential elections on May 7, followed by votes in Britain and
Germany in the coming months. Computer scientists, tech giants and
start-ups are using sophisticated algorithms and reams of online data to
quickly -- and automatically -- spot fake news faster than traditional
fact-checking groups can.
The
goal, experts say, is to expand these digital tools across Europe, so
the region can counter the fake news that caused so much confusion and
anger during the United States presidential election in November, when
outright false reports routinely spread like wildfire on Facebook and
Twitter.
The article then explains that once "fake news" is spotted, it is expunged from the Internet. It reports that:
After
criticism of its role in spreading false reports during the United
States elections, Facebook introduced a fact-checking tool ahead of the
Dutch elections in March and the first round of the French presidential
election on April 23. It also removed 30,000 accounts in France that had
shared fake news, a small fraction of the approximately 33 million
Facebook users in the country.
Were foreign
government-linked tech companies purging tens of thousands of accounts
ahead of elections in say, Thailand or Russia, it is very likely
organizations like NDI and media platforms like the New York Times would
cry foul, depicting it as censorship.
In determining what is and isn't "fake news," the New York Times offers some clues (emphasis added):
Using a database of verified articles
and their artificial intelligence expertise, rival groups -- a
combination of college teams, independent programmers and groups from
existing tech companies -- already have been able to accurately predict
the veracity of certain claims almost 90 percent of the time, Mr.
Pomerleau said. He hopes that figure will rise to the mid-90s before his
challenge ends in June.
In other words,
"fake news" is determined by comparing it directly to narratives
presented by establishment media platforms like the New York Times, the
BBC, CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, and others who have notorious track records
of serial deception, false reporting, and even war propagandizing.
Nowhere
does the New York Times explain how these "verified articles" have been
determined to be factually accurate, and instead, it appears that all
these algorithms are doing is ensuring all media falls in line with
Western narratives.
If media in question
coincides with Western-dominated media platforms, it is given a pass -
if not, it is slated for expunging as described elsewhere in the New
York Times' piece.
Thus, the National Democratic Institute, who claims on
its website to "support and strengthen democratic institutions worldwide
through citizen participation, openness and accountability in
government," finds itself promoting what is essentially a worldwide
agenda of malicious censorship, manipulating the perception of the
globe's citizenry, not supporting or strengthening it's participation in
any sort of honest political process.
To
answer the question as to what the NDI is referring to when it claims
other nations are "censoring" free speech and press freedoms, it
involves defending local fronts funded by the NDI and its parent
organization, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) who merely
repeat Western propaganda in local languages and with local spins. When
foreign nations attempt to deal with these instances of "fake news," US
fronts like NDI and NED depict it as censorship.
While
the West poses as the premier champion of free speech, citizen
participation, openness, and accountability, the New York Times article
reveals an unfolding plan to utterly crush any narrative that deviates
from Western media talking points, thus controlling citizen perception,
not encouraging "participation," and ensuring that the West alone
determines what is "opened" and held "accountable."
No
worse scenario can be referenced in human history or even among human
fiction than plans to determine for the world through automatic
algorithms and artificial intelligence almost in real time what is heard
and read and what isn't.
It is even beyond the scope and scale of George Orwell's cautionary dystopian "1984" novel.
In
a truly free society, an educated citizenry is capable of deciding for
itself what is "fake news" and what isn't. Because of the rise of
alternatives to the West's monopoly over global information, many people
are doing just that - determining that Western narratives are in fact
deceptions.
At no other point in modern
history has the Western media faced as many alternatives, and as much
skepticism on this scale, as well as an ebbing of trust domestically and
abroad.
It is no surprise then, to find the
West resorting to outright censorship, even if it cushions mention of it
with terms like "fake news."
Originally published by New Eastern Outlook - reposted with permission.
No comments:
Post a Comment