The Halloween Candy Poisoning Myth

 

The fear that people are passing out poisoned candy is a myth. Parents still are concerned about their children getting poisoned from Halloween candy. The only documented case of a child being killed by poisoned Halloween candy was in 1974. Ronald Clark O' Bryan murdered his son by contaminating his candy with cyanide. The motivation of Ronald Clark was to collect a life insurance policy worth $ 31,000. Law enforcement erroneously thought it was done by a stranger. Despite rare cases of children being poisoned during Halloween, the media created a panic. Parents became terrified, even if the criminal act was not by a random stranger. The majority of crimes that happen on Halloween are either theft or vandalism. Children are at low risk from harm. A random stranger would be caught if they attempted such an act. Assuming they are living at a permanent residence, all an investigator would need to to is retrace the steps of the homes visited. Depending on the number of homes visited it would a large number of suspects. The parents accompanying their children would have seen the faces of those distributing candy. Moral panics are a projection of   anxieties of the public. Regardless of facts, the public will be more responsive to sensationalist news reporting. The hysteria about poisoned candy relates to a myth about Halloween sadism. The myth claims that the holiday sees an increase in crime and depravity. Data does not show that more crime occurs on Halloween. The public continues to believe the Halloween candy poisoning myth, even though criminology discredits it.  

Phil Donahue Discusses Why His MSNBC Program Was Cancelled

 

Phil Donahue (1935-2024)  returned to television in 2002. This time he was not hosting a talk show, but a cable news program. The show was cancelled in 2003. The reason for the cancellation was due to that fact it was the few cable news shows voicing opposition to the Iraq War. Corporate media does not care about reporting the truth or quality journalism. At times 24 hour cable news is nothing more than propaganda for the two major political parties. MSNBC has become more uniform in thought and opinions. To a degree it is a type of censorship, but done indirectly. Asking questions or having another perspective should not be seen as unpatriotic. Their is a fear of anti-war voices reaching the American public. MSNBC claimed Donahue was cancelled due to low ratings. However, it was cancelled in February in 2003, just before the invasion in March. The cable news networks were all pushing for war and having opposing views was not acceptable. What happen to Phil Donahue was a harbinger to would happen on social platforms. Corporate media manipulates public opinion for the benefit of the ruling and political elite of the United States. The firing of Phil Donahue is a reminder of why independent media needs to grow.  

The Attempts To Ban Tik Tok

 

Governments are attempting to ban Tik Tok . The popular social media platform has been accused of disinformation and being a national security risk. These claims are being made based on anti-China sentiment. A number of countries are attempting to ban the application based on a xenophobic nationalism. The European Union has made a ban on Tik Tok to apply to staff devices. This applies to the European Parliament, European Commission, and and EU Council. The measure is unnecessary considering the only application that should be used in offices are for work , not entertainment. France, Canada, Belgium, Pakistan, Nepal, and Australia have adopted similar policies. The US motivation for the ban is because it does not want Chinese competition in the technology sector and wants censorship. Video sharing applications expose concerns that are not discussed by the mainstream media or government. While it is used mostly for frivolous purposes, videos show abuses. Israel's human rights violations and war crimes in Gaza have been exposed on various platforms. The Tik Tok ban is a test to introduce censorship on multiple platforms. The public would never accept this, so false justifications are made. Disinformation, preventing public disturbance, and national security are the common arguments. Intelligence agencies and law enforcement have a good amount of resources to deal with matters of espionage. This is not about protect, rather undermining press and free speech. Afghanistan also imposed a ban on Tik Tok on the basis it was protecting the youth. Governments both authoritarian and democratic want to prevent the public from having independent thought. More social media platforms and video sharing sites could be a target of censorship.     

Martin Luther King's Statement On The Malcolm X Assassination (1965)

 

Martin Luther King made a statement to the press on the assassination of Malcolm X. King suggested that leaders of the black nationalist movement should have a conference. The objective would be to promote peace. The assassination of Malcolm X  was a concern to Martin Luther King. The growth of violence was a problem he did not want to see spread. King states that it was elements within the black nationalist movement responsible for the murder. It was  suspected that the FBI could have had a role in Malcolm X's death. The Nation of Islam was main the main culprit, but it was evident that Malcolm X was evident being spied on by the FBI. Tensions rose when Malcolm X left the Nation of Islam, after a change in ideology. Malcolm X repudiated Elijah Muhmmad's perspective of Islam. Speculation about the role of the New York police in the assassination has grown over the years. Both Martin Luther King and Malcolm X were harassed by the FBI. It is unclear if King knew that Malcolm X was subject to the same level of surveillance. 

Russia Today Gets Banned In The EU and RT America Shuts Down

 

The Russian state owned international news network is being banned in the European Union. RT America has shut down after ten years in operation. The American staff was dismissed and programs cancelled. The claim is that RT was being used as a platform for spreading disinformation. The motivation behind this ban is due to the Russia-Ukraine conflict. The channel does provide a Russian perspective, but is also critical of EU and US foreign policy. The channel has produced documentaries regrading the Iraq War and The Afghan War. The ban on media based on its country of origin is more like xenophobia rather than a concern about disinformation. This goes against the values of press freedom and free speech. Viewers should have the right to access multiple sources of information no matter which country it originates from. The purpose of fact checkers is to expose false information. Prohibiting RT is more of a political gesture to express anger with the Russian Federation. Censorship is a threat to free press and this will reverberate. BBC and Voice of America are restricted in Russia. These were steps in retaliation for the RT restrictions .   Disinformation is being used as an excuse for censorship. Ultimately, the consumers of news around the world are put at a disadvantage. With few sources of information,  it becomes difficult to make sense of  of world events. RT still remains on  Facebook and Youtube. 

Rush Limbaugh Mocks The Chinese Language And Hu Jintao (2011)

 

Rush Limbaugh conservative radio personality and talk show host has died at the age of 70. The repeal of the Fairness Doctrine gave rise to the domination of conservative talk radio. Rush Limbaugh was the leader of this making racism and xenophobia his business model. He appealed to a segment of the population that was deeply prejudiced  and more in favor of the Republican Party. Limbaugh's radio program would make commentary not just on domestic policy, but on foreign policy. When President Obama met with President Hu Jintao Limbaugh criticized the meeting as America caving to Chinese interests. The audio clip above is of Limbaugh mocking the Chinese language. He then claims it sounds no different from Japanese and there were no translators at the meeting. These claims were false, but they were stated for a purpose. Instilling fear in people helps with getting the Republican Party votes. China and its leaders from the Obama years to present  have been demonized as a threat. The Democratic Party also plays on this with the concept of   the Chinese challenge. The Hu Jintao presidency during this time was making significant successes in relations with African nations, which created tension with America. Economic competition continues to be a source of  contention  between the two countries. Before President Trump, Rush Limbaugh was already expressing anti-Chinese rhetoric. Rush Limbaugh is a reminder that racism is fostered through media outlets.  

Kellyanne Conway's Controversial Comments

 

Kellyanne Conway had defended President Donald Trump's behavior and policies throughout his first term. There is a pattern in which the administration has women, make excuses for his past sexual misconduct. Conway during the 2016 campaign  received much criticism for her comments regarding rape and sex crimes. She stated that "rape would not exist if women were physically stronger." Conway articulated this  on a panel discussion from PBS program To The Contrary . The panel was talking about women in combat roles and Kellyanne was using her statement to exclude women from frontline combat positions. Her statement reflects major ignorance about rape and sex crimes. Men in prison are subject to custodial rape and children can be victim to molestation. Rape can occur with the presence of alcohol, which has been an issue on college campuses. Kellyanne Conway's statement demonstrates that there are women in the Republican Party and the conservative movement that assist in keeping misogyny alive. It was announced that Conway will be resigning from the White House staff. Trump was able to get some women voters, but overall he will struggle in 2020. Many of the women that serve in his administration do not advocate for women in terms of equal pay, reproductive rights, or addressing sexual violence. Simply having a woman in a cabinet position does not ensure women's rights will be protected.     

The Importance of Internet Freedom

The creation of the internet enable more communication between people globally than one could ever think was possible. Ideas, information, and various movements can spread rapidly. Internet Freedom has given rise to digital media, e-commerce, and an evolving form of technology based activism. There have been calculated means to stop the progress of this new freedom by the ruling elite of the world. Net neutrality has been under attack by various governments and corporations who realize the power of the medium. Internet freedom offers a diverse alternative media, enables a new form of commerce, and allows for a forum of open discussion on various topics or issues. The major reason why internet freedom is so essential is that it provides a vast amount of knowledge  easily available to people who have access. Once the digital divide is closed, more people have access to information. There are still places in the world that do not have reliable internet access. It is only a matter of time before this changes. It will become more difficult for information to be suppressed or hidden from public view. The internet's creation did have negative consequences. Hacking, the spread of extremist ideology, and cybercrime have become common problems with widespread internet use. Prohibition of certain internet platforms would be counterproductive. Such suggestions are designed to either hinder the flow of information or end internet freedom completely. Arguments from suppressing internet freedom range from public safety, stopping online piracy, or crime prevention. The real motive behind this is for far-right and authoritarian elements to silence the voices of dissent. If social and political movements can be started by either websites, social media, or other digital platforms networks of oppression may not have a means to counter such speed. Internet freedom could be a means for radical change of the economic, political, and social structure.
        Internet freedom can ensure preservation of a functional free press. Many nations do not have this privilege. Nations with press protection face another problem of corporate domination of news. The presentation of the truth is not the objective for a business. The major media corporations are more concerned about profit rather than high quality reporting or journalism. The authoritarian regimes seek to stifle internet access to prevent exposure to new ideas or information reaching the wider world. Exposure to new ideas or ideology can disrupt the status quo in a repressive state. The internet has become a place in which information and news is limitless. Video sharing and original content for various individuals has exposed billions of people to different perspectives. Alternative media has emerged  as a challenger to mainstream news, which presents a simplistic or biased narrative. Although major cable news networks both local and international have an online presence, they still present the same message. The critical or serious analytical element is missing, yet is replaced with opinion presented as fact. Out of frustration, consumers have turned to alternative media. Fox News, CNN, CCtv, BBC, Africa News, Euronews,  France 24, and Russia Today either have a national  or political based biased that can be seen in their reporting. The internet allows users to seek out various websites and compare information. The challenge for the user is distinguishing between fact and erroneous claims.

      
There has been an increase in what has been called fake news. Websites and social media platforms have been spreading information that is not true or checked for accuracy. Fake news is not a new phenomenon seeing as there were cases in which false statements or accusations were made in newspapers and television. Jayson Blair a former New York Times  journalist fabricated stories in 2003 regarding the Iraq War. Articles were discovered to false by the staff and Blair was forced to resign. Incidents such as that have gradually cause a more suspicion  of the media by the public. The press has come under threat from the corporate model of news, censorship, and government hostility. The internet has for the most part avoided large scale censorship that television and radio has been faced with. The issues surrounding privacy and   technology companies using personal data has gained the attention of numerous political figures. The government's concern is not the theft of personal data or the violation of privacy, but a means of either having control or more strict regulation of the internet. If net neutrality is eradicated, press freedom could lose a valuable resource. Internet service providers could easily just reduce speeds to certain websites or worse by taking them off of search engine listings. With print media disappearing, it is critical that the consumers of news have access to multiple sources of information. Media literacy become more essential in a world that is driven by information.
        Electronic commerce has become a major economic development. It has revolutionized the way people purchase products. The driving force in the contemporary consumer culture is e-commerce. None of this would have been possible without internet freedom. People have the power to buy many products at any time of day. Amazon or E-Bay has a multitude of items ranging from clothing, books, electronics, clothes, and furniture. The difference is that a consumer can also engage in selling items. The option for the individual can be to set a certain price with the hope it get s the attention of a potential buyer.  E-commerce also contributes to the survival of small businesses. Compared to large and long running corporations, smaller businesses have difficulty competing in the market. The disadvantage is obvious in terms of advertisement. A corporation can have more resources devoted to buying air time, erecting billboards, or developing public relations campaigns. A small business or start-up does that have the finance for such ambitious projects. However, social media and websites can provide spaces for advertisement at minimal cost. This creates an equal atmosphere of market competition between small business and corporations.

    
Large corporations have the benefit of  having a lower federal  income tax  rate compared to smaller businesses. Having wider internet freedom encourages an expansion of small business, which will keep the economy diversified. There is a legitimate fear that monopolies could reemerge as corporations move to more amalgamation. This is occurring more so with media and entertainment.  Entertainment and other forms of media can benefit from internet freedom. Video streaming and sharing has change the way people watch movies and TV shows. It allows for a greater variety for the viewer to choose from. As time progresses, the internet will become a large section of the entertainment industry.  Internet freedom allows commerce to happen even without a physical store or market. Staring a business or company becomes much easier with the tools of the internet. Some believe that e-commerce has been causing the decline of traditional retail stores. What is not realized is that many stores are establishing websites and online shopping options. This allows more exposure of a company's brand to the wider public. The rise of e-commerce will continue and it will become more a part of  consumers lives. The amazing phenomenon is that the divide between consumer and producer may gradually disappear.
       Internet freedom has given the average person more knowledge than previous generations. Prior to the internet, the library, school, or a book was what people referred to. Now, a person can merely type on their laptop or phone and get answers to their questions. The internet has become a large encyclopedia of a vast assortment of human experience. Video streaming as also enabled an immense archive of prominent individuals and years gone by. Knowledge has become an even greater power and commodity in the modern world. The more a person knows, the more advantages they will have. Even though many would see the internet as nothing more than senseless entertainment or a frivolous waste of time, it can be used for learning. Public schools and universities realize that a contemporary workforce needs at least some basic computer literacy skills. Schools now offer coding and computer science courses to students. Living in a technological society requires a solid knowledge base. Just having knowledge stored is not enough; people must be taught how to decipher and interpret it.

Prior to technological advancements, it was difficult for the average person to gain access to knowledge. Information was either transmitted through oral traditions in many societies. The rise of writing and language made it so a person did not have to be reliant on their memory only. The printing press gave way to the increase in literacy and the rapid transfer of information. Books became  more available and libraries became open to the public. Newspapers could print faster with a printing press. Speed of information became more important as the centuries progressed. The 20th century brought into existence two influential  forms of technology which were radio and television. People could listen or look at what was happening around the world. The establishment of the World Wide Web in 1989 would amplify how fast and the total amount of information  the public could receive. The people of the world can witness events without even leaving their own country. Information on individuals, academic subjects, or entertainment can be accessed at anytime. Research and archiving has experienced  in a sense a renaissance. The internet can have a positive effect on education and the wider knowledge base of human civilization.  The internet can contribute the spreading of ideas and the preservation of the vast body of  knowledge.
        Internet freedom also ensures that activism can continue and get large portions of people involved in a cause. There is a negative consequence to this. Hate groups, terrorist organizations, organized crime, and cyber criminals can also use internet freedom to their advantage. The only way to counter extremism to confront it with activism and facts. Organizing has become much easier with social media platforms such as Twitter or Facebook. Gathering people for a demonstration could be more complicated in the past. Making contact or attracting others to a cause would take considerable time and effort. The absence of internet freedom would mean movements such as Black Lives Matter or # Me Too may not have become as large or rapidly growing. Their is a limitation to the new wave of digital activism. Short attention spans and long term plans for change seem absent. There is the greater possibility of co-option at a faster rate. Leaders of social justice movements must be aware of this and learn to use the internet to their advantage. The term hacker has been given a negative connotation. Yet, some use their skill to expose or leak information that is deliberately hidden from the public. The exposure of government abuse and surveillance has caused many leaders  to seek more restriction to hide possible crimes.

The establishment of Wikileaks has made world leaders more nervous about possible leaks to the press. Julian Assange is not being charged because he committed a heinous act, rather he exposed  US war crimes in Iraq. The release of diplomatic cables cannot be considered classified information, yet the argument has been made it compromised national security. If Assange faces prison or possible execution then it will be a major loss for press and internet freedom. Eric Snowden who was a subcontractor for the CIA exposed the US government's expansive surveillance network of its own citizens. Both Assange and Snowden have been demonized by both government and mainstream media. Being a whistleblower  in an age of internet freedom has become easier, which puts political figures in a state of fear. No longer can acts of  corrupt  foreign  or domestic policy be denied when physical  evidence exists. The Panama Papers were leaked by an anonymous source, which revealed that world leaders and the business elite were using firms for tax evasion, fraud, or circumventing international sanctions. The documents were leaked from the former corporate service provider Mossack Fonseca. When more corruption is discovered, the greater the amount of public discord grows. Controlling the narrative seeks to keep people passive and accepting of violations or government abuse of power. Some who were active and fought to keep internet freedom alive were not so fortunate. Aron Swartz was a computer programmer and activist for internet freedom. Swartz was the founder of Demand Progress, an organization dedicated to human rights, an open internet, and transparency. Aron Swartz was also involved in the development of RSS, Creative Commons, one of the founders of Reddit, and the Markdown web publishing format. Swartz had the belief that knowledge should be free and available to everyone. Aron Swartz connected a computer to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology  network gaining access to academic journals. He was charged with under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Instead of facing a life sentence he chose suicide. Swartz's story is a tragic one, but makes it even more important to be aware about net neutrality and technology related issues. The new era of movements is going to have online activism being a part of their organizing strategies. 

          Internet freedom can protect free speech and expression to a greater extent than previously imagined. Discussions are more open in an online setting. The problem is that  can get more vitriolic and tribal. People have a tendency to associate both online and in real life with others who share their own views. So, a internet  user may not be getting more exposure to different ideas or belief systems. Inevitably they will seeing as the internet is an enormous entity of information. The way in which  a person articulates themselves online differs compared to seeing someone face to face. Online discussion can be more candid, at times more offensive, or too truthful for people to handle. There is a habit for some to impose self-censorship when debating sensitive issues. Certain topics are either ignored or not talked about at all. Racism, sexism, homophobia, police brutality, poverty, or corruption are topics that are avoided in common conversation. The internet through video displays the worst aspects of human cruelty and hatred. Without video sharing  websites, the public would not know the severe extent of police brutality. Generating conversation is the first step to initiating effective change. No topic or subject is off limits in digital space. Content can be violent, extreme, or artistic. The exchange of ideas and art can provide a creative outlet that no other medium can offer. Free speech can also be unlimited as well as expression. While a huge amount of  freedom can be a benefit, it comes with responsibility. Internet users mush be conscious of what they post or share both personally and professionally. Comments or pictures could instigate controversy and condemnation. Words do have power and it is proven with writing. New mediums always have a challenge or establishing appropriate conduct, but this is not a justification for censorship. Free speech and expression cannot exist under a society than wants everyone to adhere to a single mode of thought. The ability to share large amounts of data and information can ensure that free speech and expression has a future. 

       Net neutrality has been under attack and its effects could be devastating. Numerous global challenges do dominate including climate change, war, and poverty. It would seem that internet freedom should be a low priority. However, the only weapon that the oppressed or the struggling have is a platform to expose injustice. The mainstream media has failed in many regards in relation to reporting truth. Alternative media provides a more critical technique to global affairs. The corporate model focuses on establishing on narrative or  presents information based around a politically partisan spectrum. This distorts the view of the world, which is more complex than presented on television. Internet freedom allows a person to get access to different sources. The only way to foster media literacy is to see news from other countries and websites. Consumers must learn to see various media and compare. While some condemn or scapegoat the internet for particular troubles in society, the rise of technology should not be seen as a curse. Outcomes depend on how technology is used. E-commerce, online activism, and the spread of human knowledge is what the internet should be used for. A government controlled internet would be nothing more than a branch of a large propaganda arm. Regulations and laws are required to keep private data safe, stop online piracy,  and prevent cybercrime. However, laws should not be made to reduce a user's access  to information. Copyright should not be used as a means of corporations to hinder fair use. The internet was meant to be free and for everyone. The information age has enabled  the world to become a smaller place. An event that occurs on one part of the globe will effect the rest. More people will know about it and share information. Information technology has ushered in a possible fourth industrial revolution in which computers and artificial intelligence will be a part of our daily  lives.  Internet freedom is a human right, but at the moment few recognize it as such.        

     

A Condemnation of Censorship

When an argument for the support of censorship is made, it is justified advocates claim for the protection of the public. Censorship is an act of  oppression on multiple levels.It attempts to halt free speech, thought, or opposing views. At its worst it stifles intellectual curiosity.While these seem like minor violations of basic right it can escalate to another extreme. Imprisonment, persecution,  or death can be the devastating consequences of censorship. This has become a attribute of authoritarian systems, but democratic systems are not immune either. Free speech and press remain fragile when measures are taken in the name of national security. Even moderate levels of censorship could be potentially dangerous. The advocates of this type of censorship want to prevent offending various groups or people. This seems misguided. What may be offensive to one person could be different from another individual's perspective. Censoring media or print does not hide the reality of society's prejudices and intolerance. Policing language becomes more restrictive rather than a tool for social change. What this does is only silence debate. Censorship does not do the public a service. Censorship is the desire to control what people think, feel, read,or watch.
         It cannot be denied that censorship is a form of oppression. What it seeks to do is stop independent thought. When a person is no longer able to reason for themselves, they will be subject to easier manipulation. There is also an emotional response component. The information presented to a individual has to induce a certain reaction. The message could either be telling a person how to feel about a certain group or take a particular political position.  Truth and falsehood can no longer be deciphered. There is a war on critical thinking in which opposing views are either considered conspiracy theory or nonsense. Free speech continually is under threat from both political and corporate power. Populations that do not utilize critical thinking can easily be misled by various institutions in society. The ability to decipher information is more important now than ever. The average person has more access to information than at any point in human history. This may be the last bit of hope,but the ruling class of  various societies want to stop people from getting access. A population that has critical thinking skills or is educated cannot be controlled. The desire is to create conformity in thought and action. Putting people in an imposed state of ignorance is nothing new. The enslaved in the Americas were not taught to read for fear they would question why they were in slavery. Women were denied education, because it would make them question their lower status in society. Peasants were kept in ignorance of their condition in Europe to prevent revolts which would change the feudal order. Since these periods of oppression and social change, there has been improvement in conditions.   
        The worst acts of censorship come from the restriction on press freedom. Governments attempt to silence people who oppose certain policies. Liberal democracies have another issue,which involves the mass media being controlled by a few corporations. The result is a population thinking they are getting unbiased and new information when they are not. Authoritarian governments are more blatant about their disdain for press freedom. Uganda and Saudi Arabia for example have been known to persecute journalists or be involved in their disappearance. The murder of Jamal Khashoggi by the Saudi government demonstrates oppressive governments are willing to liquidate their own citizens who oppose the system. The United States seeks to imprison Julian Assange for documents he put on Wikileaks regarding the Iraq and Afghan wars. The liberal democracies seek to also silence opposing views,but it is done in a more covert manner. They simply do not have the political power and force of a dictatorship has to violate basic human rights to the same degree. The troubling aspect in liberal democracies is the abnormal amount of corporate influence on print and television news. If a group of corporations owns papers and networks they can stop certain stories from being reported that do not suit their objectives. Alternative media has arisen to counter the corporate news model, yet it is often presented as being fringe or based in conspiracy theory. Societies that pride themselves of free expression allow various views to be presented, yet the fact is media shapes one perspective.  The reader or viewer of media is kept in a state of ignorance about the reality of political and economic conditions.
         Prior to television or the internet books were a source of recording information. Prior to that oral traditions were common in various societies. Censorship has a long history of banning books or simply destroying them. The Catholic Church had a list of banned books considered blasphemous. During the Middle Ages it was possible to be burned at the stake for questioning religion. Nicholas Copernicus did not even publish his heliocentric theory during his lifetime for fear of punishment by the Church. Giordano Bruno was executed for promoting the Copernican model. Institutions that dislike the truth will always want to suppress numerous texts. If they cannot stop people from reading certain books, they are eliminated. The execution of people or the destruction of books has continued into the modern era. The 20th century did see similar behavior related to extreme censorship with totalitarian states in Europe. Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, and the Soviet Union went to obsessive lengths to prevent any written material getting to the public that challenged their ideology. A common practice in the Third Reich was to burn books. If books were not in line with ideas of race supremacy or militarism they were simply liquidated. Fiction works were also subject to book burning. Works of satire or comedy can be a threat to rulers or institutions that want to present their convictions as ultimate truths. If a lie can not be sustained, then war on truth must be waged. Public schools have even been known to ban books they deem to controversial  or inappropriate for students. Reading can give the people the power of knowledge and awareness, which many ruling elites want to prevent.
       The argument for censorship lacks credibility. The excuse is either for the instance of public safety or the notion certain thoughts  should not be spoken. Governments make the argument that press and free speech need restriction to ensure national security. What the real concern for them is exposure of possible abuses or illegal activities. The NSA was doing  mass surveillance of US citizens who had nothing to do with terrorist organizations. Edward Snowden exposed these programs in 2013 and ever since he has been demonized or prevented from explaining on mainstream media. There is no evidence that his links caused a spike in terrorist attacks or endangered people working in the CIA or NSA. The only actions that endanger national security is being in a permanent  state of warfare, not public awareness of  NSA programs. Moderate censorship may not be as severe as the national security or public safety argument, but still raises concerns. This extends into the concept of political correctness and what is deemed offensive. Advocates argue that certain language or speech should not be spoken on the basis it can offend certain groups. This can extend to ethnic, religious, or sexual orientation identification. The problem with this is that it is stifling free expression. What may be considered offensive to one person may not be to another. What is considered obscene or lascivious can also vary among individuals and culture. This attempt to create a safe space really only accomplishes the illusion of an inclusive atmosphere. Censoring films, TV,  social media, or any other medium does not eliminate racism, sexism, homophobia, or religious intolerance. The result is that discussion and debate are neutralized, because there are some topics that are forbidden to talk about. Free speech seems to be okay until somebody hears a view they do not like. Far-right extremists make the argument that they are having their free speech restricted, but their real intent is just to insight violence and hate. Moderate censorship cannot distinguish the difference between general disagreement and extremist thought. This leaves tech companies in a more precarious situation when their platforms are used for hate groups or terrorist organizations to organize. The government will just use that as an excuse for more regulation and censorship.
      Censorship has caused major damage throughout history. It has attacked the arts,sciences, and even free thought itself. Humanity has reached a new age in which knowledge and information is ubiquitous. Governments and the ruling classes of the world may not be able to manipulate or control populations like they used to. However, the threat of censorship has remained present along with disturbing new developments. Fake news is not a recent phenomenon due to the fact newspapers of the past were filled with bias or false information. The problem is that people of their own free will are believing what they read without serious examination. People may be willing to believe anything if it correlates to their opinions, even if the facts state other wise. The internet and social media provide a vast scope of various perspectives and information, but people require the critical thinking skills to decipher what they are reading. As there is a greater movement to dismantle net neutrality, this means censorship could reach a whole new level. This means users will have access to only certain websites under the direction of internet service providers. Censorship will become more prevalent in the future seeing as the average person has more access to information. The movement for more censorship must be resisted. Ignorance and philistine attitudes can be lethal to free society. Now more than ever it is the public must be vigilant of corruption and government abuse. There is no good reason for censorship,other than protecting the powerful. Knowledge was meant to be free and open to everyone. Censorship seeks to keep  people isolation and darkness.