Climate Change, George Soros and Censorship
Climate Change, George Soros and Censorship
Climate Change, George Soros and Censorship
In January of this year, a report was published on the website of a
nonprofit named Avaaz. The report claimed that YouTube is profiting off
of videos that deny the reality of climate change. It further lists
major advertisers who run ads on videos that question the legitimacy of
the threat that climate change poses to humanity. Since that report was
posted, several media outlets- Vice, Time, and The Verge
among them- have called for putting pressure on advertisers who would
dare advertise on any of these videos. In short, they must be punished
for not toeing the correct ideological line.
Put another way,
independent mainstream media outlets are now engaged in a
politically-motivated campaign for YouTube to demonetize any video that
questions the legitimacy of climate change. Leaving aside one’s
feelings about that legitimacy, this is the new censorship in the
digital age. Of course, Avaaz denies censorship is involved. They
claim that YouTube is not being asked to take down any video. Giving
them the benefit of the doubt- a huge doubt- it is still an indirect
method of removing “wrongthink.”
Thus
far, YouTube has questioned the methodology of the Avaaz study.
However, there are powerful activists behind this move and they are
starting to target advertisers like Uber, Nintendo, Red Bull, and Warner
Brothers. One can rest assured that if YouTube’s bottom line is
affected, they will fold. Already, Samsung has contacted YouTube to
“resolve the issue” to avoid a “repetition in the future.” Not only in
the crosshairs are independent video makers, but also mainstream news
outlets like Fox News which have content on YouTube questioning the validity of climate change.
Avaaz
wants us to fall in line with the MSM and their dire warnings about
climate change. After all, Australia is burning, right? The simple
fact is, the MSM is not exactly up to snuff on news. When one thinks of
it, the MSM is perhaps the biggest purveyors of fake news. Two
examples: coverage of the Covington school kids and, of course, the
Russian collusion hoax.
The proponents of George Soros will tell
you he is not behind this at all. They say that Avaaz is primarily
member-funded. However, there is no denial that Soros, through his
nebulous network of groups, provided the seed money for Avaaz to exist
in the first place, along with MoveOn.org and SEIU. Various prominent
figures from the Soros group, Open Society Foundation, have been listed
among the leadership of the organization.
This campaign
underscores the whole problem with climate change. If manmade climate
change were an immutable fact, there would be no need for censorship.
The consensus would be that these videos being targeted were the
creations of conspiracy theorists and fanciful thinkers. People would
watch them, laugh and move on. But, that is not the case. There is no
denying that claims about climate change have been repeatedly proven
false. Little is set in stone, if anything.
Thus, any content
that lands on either side of the debate should not be thrown in the
memory hole. The creators of videos who question the so-called
conventional wisdom and the oft-repeated “consensus view” should not be
silenced by the dictates of one of the world’s richest men and his many
proxies. Why the need for a billionaire and Avaaz to play the role of
babysitter over Internet video content? What is it they do not want us
to see, hear, and question? Could it, perhaps, be that their ideas,
beliefs, and solutions are weak from the start?
nonprofit named Avaaz. The report claimed that YouTube is profiting off
of videos that deny the reality of climate change. It further lists
major advertisers who run ads on videos that question the legitimacy of
the threat that climate change poses to humanity. Since that report was
posted, several media outlets- Vice, Time, and The Verge
among them- have called for putting pressure on advertisers who would
dare advertise on any of these videos. In short, they must be punished
for not toeing the correct ideological line.
Put another way,
independent mainstream media outlets are now engaged in a
politically-motivated campaign for YouTube to demonetize any video that
questions the legitimacy of climate change. Leaving aside one’s
feelings about that legitimacy, this is the new censorship in the
digital age. Of course, Avaaz denies censorship is involved. They
claim that YouTube is not being asked to take down any video. Giving
them the benefit of the doubt- a huge doubt- it is still an indirect
method of removing “wrongthink.”
far, YouTube has questioned the methodology of the Avaaz study.
However, there are powerful activists behind this move and they are
starting to target advertisers like Uber, Nintendo, Red Bull, and Warner
Brothers. One can rest assured that if YouTube’s bottom line is
affected, they will fold. Already, Samsung has contacted YouTube to
“resolve the issue” to avoid a “repetition in the future.” Not only in
the crosshairs are independent video makers, but also mainstream news
outlets like Fox News which have content on YouTube questioning the validity of climate change.
wants us to fall in line with the MSM and their dire warnings about
climate change. After all, Australia is burning, right? The simple
fact is, the MSM is not exactly up to snuff on news. When one thinks of
it, the MSM is perhaps the biggest purveyors of fake news. Two
examples: coverage of the Covington school kids and, of course, the
Russian collusion hoax.
The proponents of George Soros will tell
you he is not behind this at all. They say that Avaaz is primarily
member-funded. However, there is no denial that Soros, through his
nebulous network of groups, provided the seed money for Avaaz to exist
in the first place, along with MoveOn.org and SEIU. Various prominent
figures from the Soros group, Open Society Foundation, have been listed
among the leadership of the organization.
This campaign
underscores the whole problem with climate change. If manmade climate
change were an immutable fact, there would be no need for censorship.
The consensus would be that these videos being targeted were the
creations of conspiracy theorists and fanciful thinkers. People would
watch them, laugh and move on. But, that is not the case. There is no
denying that claims about climate change have been repeatedly proven
false. Little is set in stone, if anything.
Thus, any content
that lands on either side of the debate should not be thrown in the
memory hole. The creators of videos who question the so-called
conventional wisdom and the oft-repeated “consensus view” should not be
silenced by the dictates of one of the world’s richest men and his many
proxies. Why the need for a billionaire and Avaaz to play the role of
babysitter over Internet video content? What is it they do not want us
to see, hear, and question? Could it, perhaps, be that their ideas,
beliefs, and solutions are weak from the start?
Comments
Post a Comment