Censorship of conservative and libertarian speech from the Internet is real – and how it works exactly is outlined in a new, roadmap report intended for DC policymakers.
The easily readable report, entitled The Censorship Master Plan Decoded, is intended for the average American to understand how online censorship works and how the various methods of suppression work together to clamp down on free speech throughout the Internet.
It begins with a “triple threat” of institutions:
1) Corporate, legacy media
2) Left-leaning, “objective” fact-checkers and
3) Social media sites
Which attack free speech on three different fronts:
1) By fueling a “lynch mob” mentality in the public to kill “triggering” political speech,
2) By “fact checking” conservative viewpoints, judging them “fake news” while, in contrast, claiming liberal – or simply establishment – viewpoints are “factually true,” which ultimately leads to
3) “Shadow” banning – or outright removing – conservatives (including libertarians) from social media.
“These three fronts conspire to attack, defame and deplatform originators of certain types of speech (such as conservative speech, pro-Trump speech, natural health speech, pro-cannabis legalization speech, etc.,” the report’s author, Mike Adams, stated. “Thus, we are now faced with a kind of perfect storm in America – a ‘free speech apocalypse’ – where all the institutions that once called for protections of the freedom of expression are now actively conspiring to exterminate it.”
“This coordinated attack on free speech is now taking place in plain view.”
And, if left unchallenged, it will lead to a future Internet in which only one “official” opinion is allowed for each topic of discussion; a corporate monopoly will replace the Internet’s free marketplace of ideas.
No debate nor dissenting views will be tolerated.
Their overall goal is to have a “controlled” Internet in which a handful of media sites control the majority of the web traffic – and the speech allowed.
In other words, this version of the Internet is not unlike TV in the 1960s in which a handful of news outlets controlled the programming offered to the public who had no real influence in the discourse.
There are legislative solutions, however, which are presented in Part Six of the report.
“Read this document in full,” Adams added. “Forward it to your representatives in Washington D.C.”
“Urge lawmakers and our president to act on this now, or we will lose not just our freedom to speak, but our right to meaningfully participate in the dominant public space platforms through which social and professional interactions now take place.”
Click here for a fullscreen, printable version of the report, or you can read it below: