 |
| http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4042194/Facebook-fact-checker-arbitrate-fake-news-accused-defrauding-website-pay-prostitutes-staff-includes-escort-porn-star-Vice-Vixen-domme.html Arbiter: Facebook announced that Snopes.com was one of the organizations to which it would turn for 'fact-checking' when questions are raised over the veracity of news stories
One of
the lead fact-checkers, Kim LaCapria, has also been a sex-and-fetish blogger
who went by the pseudonym 'Vice Vixen.'
She
described her blog as a lifestyle website 'with a specific focus on
naughtiness, sin, carnal pursuits, and general hedonism and bonne vivante-ery.'
She
regularly provided intimate advice and reviewed sex toys, including a vibrating
wand that 'drives boys mad.'
'If
you are doing something to your fella, and you apply this to the base of his
cash-and-prizes while you carry on, he will scream and perhaps cry,' she wrote.
She
also recommended one book with the review: 'How to Tell A Naked Man What To Do
seems like the perfect how-to for the dominatrix-in-waiting, or any girl
looking to get in touch with her domme side. Mine, I wish I could shut her up
sometimes, but there you go.'
In
others posts, LaCapria claimed to be 'addicted to smutty HP [Harry Potter]
fanfic.'
Describing
her day-off activities on another blog, she wrote that she 'played scrabble,
smoked pot, and posted to Snopes.' She added, 'That's what I did on my day
"on," too.'
David
Mikkelson told the Dailymail.com that Snopes does not have a ‘standardized
procedure’ for fact-checking ‘since the nature of this material can vary
widely.’ He said the process ‘involves multiple stages of editorial oversight,
so no output is the result of a single person’s discretion.’
He
also said the company has no set requirements for fact-checkers because the
variety of the work ‘would be difficult to encompass in any single blanket set
of standards.’
‘Accordingly,
our editorial staff is drawn from diverse backgrounds; some of them have
degrees and/or professional experience in journalism, and some of them don't,’
he added.
LaCapria
did not respond to a request for comment.
 
How did we ever come to put so much faith in folks/websites that we know so little about?
Now, I am a wife of 49 years to the same man, the mother of three children and the grandmother of five. And I am a Christian. Obviously, my lifestyle is much different than that of these folks.
I just love having those folks "fact-checking" for me.
In fact, as the president of the Eagle Forum, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, I am the leader of a "hate group."
|
 |
| Screen shot from their website |
So who is the Southern Poverty Law Center and why does their opinion matter? Because these are the people who have sold themselves to several public entities as the arbiters of what is hate speech.
Their purpose as Mark Potoc, a leader of the Southern Poverty Law Center states, "The press will describe us as 'monitoring hate groups'...I want to say plainly that our aim in life is to destroy these groups, to completely destroy them."
He sees the goal of the Southern Poverty Law Center as an instrument to destroy groups with ideas different than themselves.
He sees the goal of the Southern Poverty Law Center as an instrument to destroy groups with ideas different than themselves.
This has very definitely affected the Panhandle Eagle Forum in publicizing the organization as the Panama City News Herald has refused to print an article about the Panhandle Eagle Forum, but it publishes many articles by the liberal Washington Post.
Believe it or not, the FBI partnered at one time with the SPLC in identifying hate groups. They no longer do. The Army used to have them lecture on domestic terrorism. The Army has ended that relationship. Morris Dees founded the SPLC and it has been a real money maker.
(If you really want to read some lurid material read this http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/files/morris_dees_divorce_papers.pdf This is purported to be the divorce records for Dees and his first wife. You can see where his loyalties lie.)
Aug 22, 2017 - Giving $1 million to the conservative-bashing Southern Poverty Law Center ( SPLC) wasn't enough for Apple. It is matching donations by its ...
Does the American Library Association continue to follow the guidance of assessments SPLC?
Aug 22, 2017 - Giving $1 million to the conservative-bashing Southern Poverty Law Center ( SPLC) wasn't enough for Apple. It is matching donations by its ...
Does the American Library Association continue to follow the guidance of assessments SPLC?
What should we know about these people who are censoring Conservatives?
 |
| http://www.ala.org/Template.cfm?Section=ifissues&Template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=164250 |
Now, they begin with the right quotations.
“To be afraid of any idea is to be unfit for self-government.” — Alexander Meiklejohn, Testimony on the Meaning of the First Amendment
“Censorship reflects a society’s lack of confidence in itself. It is a hallmark of an authoritarian regime . . . .” — Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart, dissenting Ginzberg v. United States, 383 U.S. 463 (1966)
“Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us.”—Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas
The core information found herein was gathered by George Pearson and Heidi Lowry, Reference Librarians at Florida International University, North Campus Library, for the Intellectual Freedom Round Table program at the 2000 ALA Annual Conference. The title of the program was “Freedom of Expression Versus Tolerance: Exploring the Limits.”
And then they go down to the organizations they use as source materials on hate speech. Notice the Southern Poverty Law Center. And also the Teaching Tolerance magazine published by the Southern Poverty Law Center, a publication a group of Dothan citizens, black and white, viewed when it was to be used for conflict resolution in the early 90s.
 |
| http://www.ala.org/Template.cfm?Section=ifissues&Template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=164250 |
This was the conclusion of those individuals presenting the program to the American Library Association:
Apparently, the American Library Association also promotes this agenda. And if you can control the books in a library and the meetings held there you can also control thought.
Third paragraph from the bottom of this presentation to the American Library Association by librarians from George Leary and Heidi Lowry, Reference Librarians at Florida International University, North Campus Library for the Intellectual Freedom Round Table program at the 200 ALA Annual Conference. The title of the program was "Freedom of Expression Versus Tolerance: Exploring the limits.
There are three analytical approaches that share a determination to limit hate speech. Critical race theorists hold that hate speech is a primary tool for ensuring dominance over historically persecuted minorities. In an America riven by racism, it is arguable that hate speech is a uniquely pernicious obstacle blocking the progress of economically, socially, and psychologically vulnerable minorities. Some gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered advocates hold that hate speech leads directly to hate crime, and serves to keep sex/gender outsiders in a compliant state of silent fear. Some feminists have argued that pornography is nothing more than a form of hate speech that reinforces stereotypes and maintains the subservience of women through images of degradation and dominance. What all these perspectives share in common is the belief that hate speech is so powerful and harmful that the targeted individual is ultimately silenced and unable to respond.
(Exactly where Conservatives find themselves these days!)
(Exactly where Conservatives find themselves these days!)
...This challenges the traditional civil libertarian notion of answering bad speech with good, since hate speech deprives its targets of the very capacity to answer back.
Amen. ... since hate speech deprives its targets of the very capacity to answer back.
Diamond and Silk have found that to be true as has Prater U and so many other Conservative voices. Perhaps my own.
Somehow
this statement has achieved truth status by the power of repeating it often
enough that people think it is fact. The first given
- is that there is such a thing as Hate Speech
- in a country where the First Amendment grants us all Free Speech.
- Any speech that does not pander to their agenda becomes HATE SPEECH.
- Strongly held cultural or religious beliefs become hate speech.
The
Southern Poverty Law Center includes Christian groups like the American Family Alliance, Family
Research Council, and the Eagle Forum in their hate speech category.
One must wonder what is their ultimate goal when one sees former administration officials having such animus toward Christianity.
If
you say it often enough by enough people with power it becomes Truth.
Kind of like in Hunger Games where Panem told the other districts that serving
up a representative to sacrifice served the greater good. Arguing against that
was hate speech and surely deserved serious consequence.
I wrote about what a group of parents found out about the "peace education" curriculum produced by the Southern Poverty Law Center. I hope you will read this. I will not repeat it now. But that is just to underline the concerted effort not just to stifle conservative thought and speech but to eliminate it all together. This "curriculum" is begun in Kindergarten. The link is below:
 |
| https://sharmanbursonramsey.blogspot.com/2017/02/conflict-resolution-or-political-and.html |
And now, in addition to the Southern Poverty Law Center, we find out that these tech entities rely upon Politifact, Snopes, and Fact Check. Their "opinion" can ban you on Twitter or have your post eliminated on Facebook.
"The new professional "fact-checking" class is, at its best, doing good, regular journalism under the pseudo-scienfic banner, complete with made-up measurements.
At their worst, they're doing opinion journalism under pseudo-scientific banners, something that's really corrosive to actual journalism, which if it's any good is about reported fact in the first place."
They admit their "authority."
"But yeah, we're human. We're making subjective decisions. Lord knows the decision about a Truth-O-Meter rating is entirely subjective. As Angie Holan, the editor of PolitiFact, often says, the Truth-O-Meter is not a scientific instrument.
Both of the nation's most prominent fact-checking organizations - FactCheck.org and PolitiFact--tilt to the political left, which makes them representative of the majority of journalists who also lean to port. Both of these groups go far beyond what they say they do, claiming to fact-check subjective things like political rhetoric that are not susceptible to fact-checking.
When the definition of what is truth is determined by a porn star at Snopes, or liberal hacks at Politifact and Fact Check, where does that put Conservatives?
“To be afraid of any idea is to be unfit for self-government.” — Alexander Meiklejohn, Testimony on the Meaning of the First Amendment
“Censorship reflects a society’s lack of confidence in itself. It is a hallmark of an authoritarian regime . . . .” — Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart, dissenting Ginzberg v. United States, 383 U.S. 463 (1966)
“Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us.”—Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas
No comments:
Post a Comment
I would love to hear from you!