TorrentFreak Publishes NEWS, Starz has Twitter REMOVE Post

The headlines around the internet is about “Starz Issues Apology to TorrentFreak”, but the actual story is that the social media giant Twitter, is taking down news because someone didn’t like the contents. If you Google “Starz Torrentfreak”, most articles you will see are about the apology and not the actual story.

What Happened?

TorrentFreak published an article about how a a bunch of shows got leaked before they are aired. This is not out of the ordinary for TorrentFreak to write about considering this is what they do, cover digital piracy.

Unreleased episodes of several high-profile TV-shows including American Gods, The 100, Bless This Mess, and Knightfall have leaked online. The leaks appear to come from promotional screeners, some of which carry revealing watermarks. The pirate releases are sponsored by a Russian gambling site.

from TorrentFreak.com

The leaks contained several unreleased episodes of Starz’s series, “American Gods”. To the people reading TorrentFreak articles, this is a big deal, but it wouldn’t be to the average person. As with all things, they posted it to Twitter dot com, the most wholesome, non toxic website out there. The post was just a simple description with an image and a link to the article.

Screenshot 2019-04-12 at 9.34.14 PM-01

Shortly after the post, it got taken down due to a complaint from The Social Element Agency for copyright infringement, on behalf of Starz. It has been put back onto Twitter after the “apology”.

The actual story is being covered up because “Starz apologized”. Why aren’t people talking about how a social network took down a news article because of copyright claims? How is a news article copyrighted? Twitter has been under a ton of scrutiny because of it’s heavy hand of banning people for sometimes no reason. Imagine a day when social media sites can just be asked to take down a news article because it is counter productive to someone else, then they do it without looking into it. Oh wait, we don’t have to imagine, we are seeing it now, and hardly anyone is talking about it. This may just be one incident, but this is what they call a slippery slope. If we don’t make a fuss about this, then there will be another, then another, then another, and eventually its YOUR content. I may be being a little over dramatic about this, but both things can be true at the same time.

>>>Ad – Click the image to order your Trump coin<<<

trump coin.gif

Advertisements

Gab is Not Responsible for Tree of Life Shooting

About 10,000,000 tweets vs 48,000 gabs.  That’s the difference between “hate speech” content on Twitter vs Gab.  Yet Gab is under heavy attack, by the media, because the crazed Tree of Life shooter used Gab.  He also used Facebook and Twitter, yet Gab is the only one that has had all it’s support pulled.  I got these figures by from the tweet found underneath, and then by finding out how many users were on each platform; 3% for Twitter, 6% for Gab.

 

 

In short, Gab doesn’t censor anyone.  However there was recently an attack that they we’re letting people post child pornography, but Andrew Torba (The CEO) was posting that they certainly do boot them immediately.  I would post a screenshot of him stating this, but Gab is down as of writing this.  But they can’t say the site goes without moderating.

Screenshot 2018-10-29 at 4.10.57 PM-01

As you can see, they are not sitting idly by while being attacked.  They have taken to their competitor, Twitter, so they can keep their base connected to whats going on.  Which is kind of ironic that Twitter hasn’t banned them, Twitter is very heavy handed with bans.

What can we take away from this situation?  Free speech is not easy, it does come with “hate” speech.  But you don’t combat this by shutting them down, you have to have a better argument than them.  If Gab is this big bad awful place, it will sink eventually, so why try so hard to go after their payment processor and their website host?  Perhaps Gab struck a cord with it’s free speech that others need shut down?  How big of a threat are they?  Gab has been growing quite a bit lately, and are even seeing attacks in different form, as I mentioned the child pornography situation earlier.  I don’t know much about it, but I’ll share the little I did read while it was happening.  There was an organization accusing them of allowing child pornography on their site, which Gab found was not the case.  Then all of a sudden, a bunch of new users were made and was posting the garbage on Gab.  That’s when Torba said it wasn’t welcome and the accounts were removed immediately.  Considering how closely they were working with law enforcement to provide information about the Tree of Life shooter, I’d imagine they forwarded that info to them, too.  (If anyone from Gab is reading this, and this is inaccurate in anyway, please comment so I know)

To those that hate Gab – Stop attacking them if they aren’t a threat.  Let them and their community grow or die on their own, and stop fanning the flames because they will rise out of the ashes, and it’s going to be a bigger fight.

 

Tech Companies Know Better Than You

Twitter, the final holdout of the big tech companies, has finally banned Alex Jones and Infowars.  But that isn’t what we are going to talk about today.  I want to discuss what they are really doing when they ban people like Alex Jones from their platforms – They know better than you.  It is truly silly to ban people from, especially, Twitter, because they have mute and block buttons already, why does the company have to go that extra mile and erase people?  It makes no sense when you think of the “publisher” or “platform” problem they may soon face.  if they are publishers, they are responsible for everything content creators make and push on their sites.  So if someone tried to sue Twitter for something Alex Jones does, than Twitter would have to take responsibility and cover him under their legal umbrella.  So, as a publisher, it would make sense if they ban Infowars.  But as a platform, which is what Facebook, YouTube and Twitter claim to be, they are not there to police people and anything they do they are not responsible for.  Which is the way it should be, but does that give them the right to ban Infowars?  Absolutely, but it’s a mistake, they will lose the trust of people if they police content they disagree with, instead of letting us use the tools they give us, to either elevate them or block them.  They do this, because they know better than you.  Free speech needs to stay alive, and the big tech companies need to stay neutral, or our internet as we know it, is gone.

13966668_f1024

Infowars may be banned from the large services, but you can still find them.  They have a bitchute channel, or just go to infowars.com