Last month, Twitter permanently banned Dr. Robert Malone — who has widely been credited with inventing the mRNA technology used in the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 immunizations. Following the Twitter ban, Dr. Malone appeared on the Joe Rogan podcast, in one of the most viral episodes ever. That podcast and all subsequent clips were then banned from YouTube.
Malone wasn’t inciting hatred toward groups of people or calling for an overthrow of the US government. He was merely presenting facts that were inconvenient to the established narrative, and for this, he was memory-holed by the arbiters of information in big tech.
Peaceful discourse over the last two years has become an enemy to the status quo. No longer can the plebes question their rulers on official channels. Instead, they are pushed to the outskirts of the internet and logical well-formed arguments are then mixed in with dark and ridiculous conspiracy theories in what appears to be a deliberate act to stifle free thought.
Dr. Malone was just one of many esteemed minds who have been unceremoniously silenced into oblivion by big tech as these information controllers delete content that runs counter to their narrative. They claim this mass censorship and narrative control is carried out to keep you safe. But as a recent report from The Internet Watch Foundation (IWF) illustrates, as big tech clamps down on free speech, they allow child sexual abuse to not only spread — but flourish.
According to the new data from IWF, online sexual exploitation of 7-10 year olds exploded in 2021 with a 300% increase. This increase was part of a record-breaking number of child sexual abuse images being transferred and exchanged on platforms who rampantly censor doctors and scientists for challenging the status quo.
Thanks to government imposed lockdowns and “virtual learning” more children were online last year, which increased their odds of encountering sexual predators.
According to IWF, the foundation received more complaints about child sexual abuse images, also known as child pornography, in 2021, than they have in the last 15 years combined.
Social media sites like Facebook and Twitter are increasingly being used by child predators for grooming and sexual exploitation, according to the data — even children who parents may consider “too young” to be in danger.
As advocacy group, Parents Together Action points out, while parents are a critical part of keeping kids safe online, tech platforms also need to address the massive and growing problem of online child sexual abuse. The IWF data is Europe-centric data about an international problem, which US-based tech companies have a unique opportunity to protect children from.
Unfortunately, however, these tech companies are seemingly more concerned with banning folks for questioning the safety of vaccinations and covid protocols than they are with protecting children — and the data proves it.
Not only are these companies not interested in stopping child sex abuse on their platforms, but as TFTP reported, they are profiting from it. While banning those who question the status quo, Twitter is alleged in a lawsuit to have victimized children by knowingly allowing a video of them to go viral.
The victims sued the platform alleging that it benefitted financially by failing to remove the video featuring the children — which was retweeted thousands of times and garnered nearly 200,000 views.
To be clear, this was not a mistake that simply didn’t pick up on the nature of the content. The boy and his mother, according to the lawsuit, repeatedly contacted Twitter about the content, but the social media giant allegedly didn’t suspend accounts distributing it until a federal agent from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) intervened.
In fact, according to the lawsuit, Twitter even responded to the boy and his mother via email and said the child porn did not violate its policies. According to the suit, an email shows Twitter telling John Doe on Jan. 28, 2020, that it “reviewed the content, and didn’t find a violation of our policies, so no action will be taken at this time.”
“What do you mean you don’t see a problem?” the minor asks in a response that same day. “We both are minors right now and were minors at the time these videos were taken. We both were 13 years of age.”
A subsequent screen shot shows that the video accumulated 167,000 views within a day and received more than 2,200 retweets and 6,640 likes.
Facebook is just as guilty.
As Facebook moves the needle on censorship of free speech to an all time high, last year, they were sued in the Texas Supreme Court for allowing child predators to groom and recruit children for sex-trafficking.
The group sued Facebook for negligence and product liability, saying that Facebook failed to warn about or attempt to prevent sex trafficking from taking place on its internet platforms. The suits also alleged that Facebook benefited from the sexual exploitation of trafficking victims, according to a report in the Houston Chronicle.
The three victims accused Facebook of “running “an unrestricted platform to stalk, exploit, recruit, groom, and extort children into the sex trade.” One was 15 when an older man contacted her on Facebook, offered her a modeling job, photographed her, posted the pictures on the now-defunct BackPage website, and prostituted her to other men, leading her to be “raped, beaten, and forced into further sex trafficking.” The other two girls were 14, and reported almost identical experiences, with one openly pimped out for “dates” on Instagram, a Facebook subsidiary,” Graham Dockery explained.
Facebook lawyers argued the company was shielded from liability under Section 230 of the federal Communications Decency Act, which states that what users say or write online is not akin to a publisher conveying the same message.
This should totally be the case, but if Facebook can claim Section 230 on child trafficking, then why do they target and eliminate political speech so viciously? If Facebook does not act as a neutral party and removes peaceful anti-establishment content, they have no legal basis to claim entitlement under Section 230. Neither does Twitter.
As the great purge of anti-establishment views continues, remember that these companies who claim they have your best interests in mind, are deleting potentially life-saving discourse while child predators thrive on their platforms.