Big Tech really doesn’t like it when The New York Post reports on stories that cast their fellow leftists in a negative light. In fact, their leaders dislike it so much that they have shown they are more than willing to brazenly censor the news outlet when they are concerned that a particular story might threaten their agenda. In this case, Facebook decided that its users should not see the revelations regarding a Black Lives Matter leader who purchased a $1.4 million home in Southern California. Perhaps Mark Zuckerberg thinks he’s doing his part to safeguard black lives by not allowing the group’s hypocrisy to be exposed.
Social Media Target New York Post Again
On Thursday, Facebook’s censorship brigade decided to block a New York Post article detailing how Patrisse Cullors recently purchased an expensive home in Topanga Canyon, California. This is not the first time that the newspaper had to deal with Big Tech’s antics.
The news outlet wrote:
“This is the third time we’ve tangled with social media giants in the past year. In the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, we published a column that suggested the virus could have leaked from a Chinese virology lab. Facebook’s “fact-checkers” decided this was an opinion you weren’t allowed to have, and blocked the article. Today, it’s a commonly discussed theory, with officials from former CDC Director Dr. Robert Redfield to CNN’s Sanjay Gupta saying it can’t be discounted. Even the head of the World Health Organization (WHO) has said it can’t be ruled out.”
It also noted how Twitter blocked its story about a laptop that Hunter Biden left at a repair shop in Delaware. “Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey admitted to lawmakers months later it was a ‘total mistake,’” they wrote. However, the company also suspended the Post’s account over the story. Sounds like a pretty convenient “mistake,” doesn’t it?
The outlet explained why it did not make sense to censor its piece. “The $3.2 million real estate spending spree of BLM co-founder Patrisse Khan-Cullors is newsworthy for two reasons,” they wrote. “One, she’s an avowed Marxist, and as a public figure, it’s legitimate to question whether she’s practicing what she preaches. Secondly, as the article details, the finances of Black Lives Matter are opaque, a mixture of for-profits and tax-free nonprofits, and they don’t reveal how much its executives are paid. Are the people donating to BLM helping to pay for these properties?”
The author explained that the Post’s article did not expose Cullors’ address but did feature “some pictures of the properties she bought, but includes no addresses, in fact, doesn’t even say the city in some cases.” The article goes on to point out that the BLM leader contacted Facebook, where she got a “more sympathetic ear,” and the company decided that the story supposedly violated its “community standards.”
Big Tech Is Exposing Itself
Platforms like Facebook and Twitter might be afraid of right-leaning news outlets exposing their beloved high-profile leftists. Still, in engaging in this blatantly biased censorship, they are exposing themselves. As the Post noted: “In public, they claim to be ‘neutral’ and that they aren’t making editorial decisions in a cynical bid to stave off regulation or legal accountability that threatens their profits. But they do act as publishers — just very bad ones.”
The author’s arguments are apt: the powers that be at these companies are deceptively claiming neutrality when they know they are anything but. The question is, how long will it be before lying about their bias stops shielding them from government intervention?
Read more from Jeff Charles.