by Susan Duclos, All News Pipeline:
The MSM, liberals and Democrats have found their culprit who was "colluding" with Russia to influence the 2016 presidential election, someone to finally blame for the fact that their candidate lost the election, someone to attack and destroy..... Mark Zuckerberg and his social media website, Facebook.
KARMA, BABY, KARMA!
Recently Facebook’s chief security officer, Alex Stamos admitted that Russia had "likely" used 470 fake accounts to buy about $100,000 worth of advertising promoting “divisive social and political messages” to Americans, and according to the Daily Beast, those "propaganda" ads could have reached anywhere between 23 million users to 70 million users.
As expected, the MSM, liberals across the board and Democratic politicians and Republicans to boot, have jumped on this news with brutal attacks on Facebook and it's founder Mark Zuckerberg. Headlines blaring about how Facebook was used by Russia to influence the 2016 presidential election, letters from campaign finance reform group, accusing Facebook of being used as an “accomplice” in a Russian influence scheme, Yahoo reports, with Rachel Cohen, a spokeswoman for Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, screeching about how "The American public has a right know how Russian ads were used on Facebook to influence the election!!!"
Anyone who has read my work over the years, knows I am no fan of Facebook, nor Mark Zuckerberg, but this outrage by some of the very same people and news outlets that protected and defended Zuckerberg and Facebook when he was "colluding" with German Chancellor Angela Merkel to censor Islamic terrorism news for political purposes and to "influence" Facebook users, by labeling it "anti-immigranthate posts" and/or "racism," exposes their extreme double standards.
The two were overheard exchanging words on a live transmission broadcast on the United Nations website, as participants took their seats at a U.N. development summit in New York on Saturday, Bloomberg reported.
After Ms. Merkel asked Mr. Zuckerberg about offensive posts on the refugee crisis, the Facebook CEO said “we need to do some work” on the issue.
“Are you working on this?” Ms. Merkel asked in English, Bloomberg reported.
“Yeah,” Mr. Zuckerberg reportedly responded, before the transmission was disrupted.
A surge of Syrian refugees seeking asylum in Germany has spurred a spate of attacks on refugee centers and anti-immigrant sentiment, Bloomberg reported. Earlier this month, Facebook vowed to clean up racist content on its German website by partnering with a German Internet watchdog, called Voluntary Self-Monitoring of Multimedia Service Providers, to monitor suspected hate postings.
After that discussion reports showed that Facebook blocked conservative radio host Michael Savage for posting news on Islamic crime in 2016, amidst the U.S. presidential election where refugee immigration in the U.S. was one of the big campaign issues, among other countless examples of censoring the news in order to "influence" the election on behalf of Hillary Clinton, who was on record as calling for a 550% increase of Syrian refugees into the U.S.
We assume that was alright with the mainstream media and liberals and Democratic politicians because Zuckerberg was using his social media platform to hide content that didn't fit with liberal ideology.
Where was that outrage when it was revealed in 2016, again in the midst of a presidential campaign, that Facebook curators were actively suppressing conservative news sources from their "trending news" section, while artificially injecting liberal news, all in order to "influence" voters by hiding any news that didn't fit their liberal bias?
Another former curator agreed that the operation had an aversion to right-wing news sources. “It was absolutely bias. We were doing it subjectively. It just depends on who the curator is and what time of day it is,” said the former curator. “Every once in awhile a Red State or conservative news source would have a story. But we would have to go and find the same story from a more neutral outlet that wasn’t as biased.”
Stories covered by conservative outlets (like Breitbart, Washington Examiner, and Newsmax) that were trending enough to be picked up by Facebook’s algorithm were excluded unless mainstream sites like the New York Times, the BBC, and CNN covered the same stories.
Now the very same people that truly didn't care about Zuckerberg allowing Facebook to be used to "influence" the election are now "demanding" that they reveal their internal data and the specific ads they found that were connected to Russia, yet no one cared when Zuckerberg and company refused to reveal the extent of their conservative news suppression or algorithms.
Where was the outrage on the part of the media about "influencing" a foreign election when the Obama administration gave $350,000 tax payer dollars to an Israeli group that used the money to build a campaign to oust Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Israeli parliamentary elections?
Some $350,000 was sent to OneVoice, ostensibly to support the group’s efforts to back Israeli-Palestinian peace settlement negotiations. But OneVoice used the money to build a voter database, train activists and hire a political consulting firm with ties to President Obama’s campaign — all of which set the stage for an anti-Netanyahu campaign, the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations said in a bipartisan staff report.
Hmmmmmmmmm..... if we had a scale here, and on one side was $100,000 worth of advertising on Facebook by entities tied to Russia, and on the other side was $350,000 spent by the Obama administration which was used to build a database, train activists and hire a firm with ties to Obama, to "influence" a foreign election..... which is worse?
Read More @ AllNewsPipeline.com