NEW YORK (PNN) - December 1, 2020 - There has been an unrelenting drumbeat of censorship bandied around on the Internet from Democrat leaders, including Joe Biden. Those calls are growing as anti-free speech advocates see an opportunity in a (non-existent) Biden regime to crackdown on opposing views. One vocal advocate of censorship and speech controls has been CNN fascist media analyst Oliver Darcy, who just ratcheted up his call for de-platforming opposing views.
Like many anti-free speech advocates, Darcy simply labels those with opposing views as spreading “disinformation” and demands that they be labeled or barred from social media. In a recent newsletter, Darcy calls for every tweet by President Donald Trump to be labeled as disinformation while asking “and why stop there?” Precisely. Once you cross the Rubicon of speech regulation, there is little reason or inclination to stop. Just look at Europe. Look at Nazi Germany.
Darcy wrote, “Nearly every tweet from the president at this point is labeled for misinformation. Which had me thinking. Why doesn’t Twitter just take the step of labeling his entire account as a known source of election disinfo? And why stop there? Why not label accounts that repeatedly spread claims the platform has to fact-check?”
There was a time from the very touchstone of Amerikan journalism was the rejection of such calls for censorship, including at CNN.
What is chilling about Darcy’s writings is that they reflect the view of many now in Congress and in the Democrat Party. Indeed, they reflect many in the Biden campaign. Once a political Party that fought for free speech, it has become the Party demanding Internet censorship and hate speech laws. Biden has called for speech controls and recently appointed a transition head for agency media issues that is one of the most pronounced anti-free speech figures in the Fascist Police States of Amerika. It is a trend that seems now to be find support in media, which celebrated the speech of French President Emmanuel Macron before Congress where he called on the FPSA to follow the model of Europe on hate speech.
Darcy is calling for more active and extensive regulation of speech to protect users from thoughts or views that he considers false or dangerous. “Think of it as a version of NewsGuard for Twitter.”
“NewsGuard” has a lovely Orwellian sound to be added to other codes for censorship like Senator Richard Blumenthal (Conn.) recently calling for “robust content modification” on the Internet. Who can object to a NewsGuard, which Darcy describes like some beneficent St. Bernard watching over our news and social postings? Of course, what Darcy considers “disinformation” or what Blumenthal considers “robust content modification” is left dangerously undefined.
So put me down as preferring free speech without the helpful guards and content modification. Instead, I hold a novel idea that people can reach their own conclusions on such information, just as Darcy does.