Facebook has consistently prevented factually accurate American Thinker (AT) articles from being boosted, while permitting the promotion of meanspirited liberal doggerel.
“Boosting” on Facebook is a paid service whereby businesses or individuals can pay to promote their posts more widely, including to target audiences. Over the last three weeks Facebook has refused boosting for seven articles that I wrote for AT, but has allowed me to boost a CNN article that was ideological.
My writing is my art, as well as my political speech and ultimate “free expression.” It is based on decades of study as an attorney, farmer, and intellectual. I am not paid anything to write for AT — my wage is a sense of meaningful contribution to important dialogues.
Facebook does not owe me a platform. But does it owe me honesty? Shall it parade as open and unbiased while censors one political view over another? This is neither journalism, nor “social media” — it is something sinister, restrictive of liberty, insidiously pernicious. If the platform is not equal, and quells facts and legal scholarship in favor of ranting tripe, it should advertise that, fairly.
On February 1, AT published my commentary reporting the launch in Vermont of a new acronymical class of citizens granted special status: ADOS (American Descendants of Slaves). This group excludes Native Americans and Jews, classifying based on a presumed historical prejudice but excluding other marginalized groups. Too extreme for Facebook: boost denied.
On February 12 my piece on regressive taxation by those calling themselves progressive — an incontrovertibly well-established factual argument using links to public documents — was rejected for boosting by Facebook. Similarly, on February 15 my discussion of an overtly racist, incendiary Vermont BLM poet was deemed unworthy of paid dissemination. Not one media outlet in America (aside from AT) has reported these hateful railings against rural Vermonters. Facebook is ensuring it stays that way.
On February 17 AT published my revelations that Vermont (like many states) threw federal meals guidelines to the wind — and a great deal of CO2 and pollutants as well — when it used fleets of school buses to deliver meals to pretty much anybody who wanted one. This was never approved by voters, was gratuitously regressive (guidelines could easily have been preserved), and environmentally incompetent. But Facebook ensured fewer voters learned of these truths, rejecting the boost (in the name of stopping “false news”?). February 18th featured a commentary relating a horrible rant in the Vermont House by a representative who called his own constituency white supremacists — during a devotional! Too hot for Facebook: “Boost Rejected!”
Liberal Post Boosted
But on February 19, I posted (and successfully boosted) a CNN opinion piece railing against Vermont because it didn’t pay $10,000 enticements to immigrants of color to relocate to Vermont as part of its (deservedly infamous) “pay-to-come-live-here” program. But to allocate money based solely on race is patently unconstitutional; this person is neither an attorney nor a Vermonter; the piece is slanderous and negative, lacking supportive evidence or law. Facebook will allow me (a conservative) to pay them money to promote something false, slanderous against my state, and that I did not pen, but denies me the ability to promote my own scholarly work.
After wincing through a paid promotion of a patently toxic CNN commentary, I discovered a new hurdle when my February 20 AT piece was posted on Facebook: the message “Boost Unavailable.” Apparently my persistence had incurred an algorithmic rebuke, and now I was not even permitted to try to boost my AT writing. This article related an incident in Vermont where a newly-created “Race and Inclusion Committee” announced it would draft policies based on closed hearings at which white people were banned. This is flagrantly unconstitutional, and unreported in national news media.But Facebook says “verboten.”
February 21 marked my seventh boost rejection of an AT article by Facebook in less than three weeks. This article considered the call by Vermont’s “Executive Director of Racial Equity” to pause regulatory initiatives to reduce Vermont’s CO2 footprint because “deadlines reinforce a white supremacist culture.”
Free Exchange of Ideas Compromised
Almost all of my articles are commentaries built on facts which are then used for discussion. Is reporting facts — regressive tax policies, exclusive meetings based on melanin pigment, contents of a devotional, poetry that calls for jailing and killing white people, using school buses to deliver meals inequitably, a novel acronym, a “race official” calling to halt global warming solutions — the equivalent of political statements? As we see here, facebook blocked the dissemination of facts in the name of… a mysterious process that remains in the dark. This is two-faced; Darkbook; Orwellian fascism.
Poland is well ahead of the United States in preserving liberties: it has legislated fines against companies that institute stealth filtration of speech:
“Freedom of speech is not something that anonymous moderators working for private companies should decide,” said [Deputy Minister of Justice Sebastian] Kaleta…. Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki announced… in a Facebook post, ironically enough, that ….“We are now increasingly faced with practices we believed were left in the past,” he added. “The censoring of free speech, once the domain of totalitarian and authoritarian regimes, is now back, but in a new form, run by corporations who silence those who think differently.” “Discussion consists in the exchange of views, not in silencing people. We do not have to agree with what our opponents write, but we cannot forbid anyone from expressing views that do not contravene the law,” he added.
America is the opposite — Democrats have openly, vulgarly, demanded that these same entities filter conservatives out and leave dumb lies in.
Facebook will not likely permit boosting of this commentary. Therefore, please “post and share” it… freely.