Big Tech's Influence On Society

"The promise of the internet was a democratization of information and commerce, but the current reality falls short of this ideal." This amounted to a dream and assumed everybody plays by the rules. Governments don't.

It was inevitable that -- if the Internet became a distribution centre for disclosure of tons of truth, reality and exposures and criticisms of government and corporate policies -- that these orgs would do something to block it. Their first attempt was using social platforms like Faceache and Twitter. That has been fairly successful but not enough for governments. So they are now passing laws to control Free Speech and to incriminate anybody who dares speak the truth if it is critical of ruling elites.

The excuse for these new laws is to stop "misinformation, disinformation" etc", but we already know that governments themselves are the biggest producer of misinformation, disinformation, lies and propaganda.

In the US federal and some state governments are doing their best to trash the 1st Amendment, so desperate they are to silence people. Many other countries like the UK don't even have a documented Constitution, so it got stuffed with the so-called fake "Online Safety Act" which has little to do with online safety and is mostly about silencing people. This Act was initially tabled by the Conservative Treason May and then supported by Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak. Starmer's Labour luvvies will toughen it up.

BIG TECH & THE CORRUPT MAINSTREAM MEDIA have now become a FUNDAMENTAL THREAT to the republic and now both diabolical ENEMIES OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

The telecommunications act of 1996 paved the way for mass indoctrination and full spectrum dominance of the many by the few.

Big tech is just a government extension using figureheads as CEOs so it can do things it isn't supposed to do with plausible deniability. Same with all NGOs. It's amazing people don't catch on considering how simplistic the scam is.

Psychopath's that control media have some control, but there a lot of different sources of info outside the MSM. Unfortunately, people are lazy to search for it and many don't care.

It's all rigged. And they all work for whomever pays them the most. Totally filthy corrupted. It's been said that the US Constitution was "Designed for a Moral and Religious People".

I mean just look at how the sheeple today are mostly still very eager to work in and./or chase (aka "invest") into the stocks of Big Pharma / Big Tech / Big Media / Big Agri / Big Oil / Big Banks / Big Corporations and/or continue to pay taxes to Big Governments, and/or willingly enlist as cannon fodder for Big Millitaries. Its all part of the "games" we all choose to play.

So the People is the problem as well as the solution for humanity. As long as individuals don't want to move to a higher consciousness within and change their own behaviors, then the bread & circus show will go on indefinitely and NOTHING will change.

Monkey see, monkey do. That little saying sums up the MSM best.

The Digital Puppeteers: Big Tech's Influence On Society
Via SchiffGold.com

Oct 02, 2024

Tech companies have revolutionized the modern age, allowing for transcontinental communication, instant access to information, and unprecedented connectivity between people worldwide. But this revolution has come at a cost; these companies have undue influence over our lives, possessing the capability to shape public discourse, consumer behavior, and even political outcomes.

The scale of Big Tech’s market dominance is staggering. Google controls 81% of all general searches and Meta’s Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp collectively boast 3.27 billion daily active users. Amazon commands almost 50% of all U.S. e-commerce. These figures demonstrate how a handful of companies can wield unprecedented power over our digital lives.

This concentration of power allows Big Tech firms to design markets in ways that benefit themselves and stifle competition. It can result in higher prices for consumers and reduced innovation as smaller competitors are squeezed out.

The impact of this monopolistic control extends beyond economic concerns to the sanctity of our democratic discourse. As these platforms have become the de facto public squares of the digital age, their content moderation policies and algorithmic decision-making wield enormous influence over what information reaches the public.

Big Tech’s selective censorship has become increasingly apparent, with conservative voices often bearing the brunt of content moderation. In 2020, a New York Post exposé on Hunter Biden’s laptop was suppressed on both Twitter and Facebook. After the first Trump assassination attempt, Google intentionally omitted search results which referenced the attack, despite providing suggestions for historical assassination attempts on other presidents. These incidents highlight the growing concern over Big Tech’s power to shape public discourse through selective content moderation.

At the core of this issue lies Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, which shields interactive computer services from liability for content posted by users. While originally intended to promote free speech online, this provision has become a double-edged sword. It allows platforms to avoid responsibility for harmful or false content while simultaneously giving them broad discretion to censor or promote content as they see fit.

This legal framework has created a situation where Big Tech companies enjoy the benefits of both publisher and platform status without the corresponding responsibilities of either. They can curate content to maximize engagement and profits while avoiding accountability for the societal impacts of their decisions.

While proponents of the current system argue that users have the freedom to choose alternative platforms, the reality is far more complex. The network effects and data advantages enjoyed by incumbent players create significant barriers to entry for potential competitors. As Kashmir Hill’s experiment demonstrated, it’s nearly impossible to avoid the services of Big Tech companies entirely, as their reach extends far beyond their branded products and services.

As the digital economy often tends towards natural monopolies, simply breaking up these companies or imposing heavy-handed regulations is not the answer. The solution to these challenges must balance the need for innovation with the protection of free speech and fair competition.

This calls for a comprehensive re-evaluation of our regulatory framework for the digital age. This could include reforming Section 230 to strike a better balance between platform immunity and accountability and increasing transparency in algorithmic decision-making and content moderation practices.

The promise of the internet was a democratization of information and commerce, but the current reality falls short of this ideal. We must remember that a truly free market of ideas and commerce requires vigilance against the concentration of power, whether in the hands of governments or corporations.

By fostering genuine competition, protecting free speech, and ensuring accountability, we can harness the transformative potential of technology while preserving the fundamental principles of a free and open society. The stakes are too high to allow a handful of companies to become the arbiters of our digital lives.

Some comments:

The CEO and exec teams are literally leftists. They want control. They don’t care about things like free speech. They want to shape culture to be degenerates like they are.

The rightists want control, too. That's the battle. it has nothing to do with citizens and ****.

The rightists would like to work within the framework of the Constitution (well, mostly).

It always amazes me how so called free market capitalists deny the right of corporations to censor. No one is forcing you to use these platforms and if you are too stupid to use Mastedon and IRC and I2P for privacy that is not the fault of the tech companies. Educate yourself.

Spot on. Right & Left / Red & Blue / East vs West are all simply opposing narratives to make y'all go round & round in endless circles constantly bewildered and confused.

Given a chance for a leadership role / job / position, even "normie" Sheeples often becomes a "Collectivist"  s**head who wants to control what other people do or not do too. Its part of human behavior.

Everybody likes to think they are not "degenerates" but when given an opportunity, who can say their inner demons will not have a high probability of acting up too... unless they happen to be a Jesus.