Case in point: The difference in the way the Left treats its favored – and disfavored – social media platforms in the wake of an incident or tragedy.
You may have heard recently that a nut job named Cesar Sayoc, an alleged supporter of POTUS Donald Trump, sent phony bombs to prominent Democrats and the most dishonest cable news outlet on the air today, CNN.
It turns out that Sayoc was quite a prolific Twitter user, as he used the platform to post in excess of 240 threats to 50 different people and without any penalty whatsoever. The media’s reaction to Twitter? Tepid at best.
Less than a week later, after a rabid anti-Semite (and Trump opponent) walked into The Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh and killed 11 people while wounding four police officers, the same disgustingly dishonest “mainstream” media essentially forced social platform Gab offline because the alleged shooter, Robert Bowers, posted anti-Semitic material on his Gab account.
Why is one platform allowed to survive such media scrutiny but the other isn’t? Well, because one – Twitter – was founded by an avowed liberal/progressive/Leftist, Jack Dorsey, and the other, Gab, was founded by free-speech advocate and non-Leftist Andrew Torba.
CNN did manage to get around to discovering that “Sayoc tweeted more than 240 threats to at least 50 public officials, news organizations and media personalities.” So not only was CNN’s interest piqued because the guy’s a Trump supporter, they were angry that he dared to target media people and their own network. (Related: Is “MAGA bomber” Cesar Sayoc a patsy? He first told authorities he never sent fake bombs to Democrats.)
But Twitter got what was essentially the media’s equivalent of a slap on the wrist. The network noted:
The threats, and Twitter’s apparent inaction regarding them, raise new questions regarding social media and radicalization. In this instance, Twitter may well have provided Sayoc with the material that radicalized him, and then it stood idly by as that radicalization led to hundreds of threats.
Okay, tepid. Nothing like what Gab received after it was discovered that a white guy and anti-Semite was posting his garbage there, and again without any rebuke from the platform.
The difference is obvious
Free speech social network Gab, however, was forced offline this week after media outlets and figures blamed the platform for allowing Tree of Life Pittsburgh Synagogue shooting suspect Robert Bowers to make anti-Semitic comments on his account — where Bowers also made several posts attacking President Trump and the MAGA movement, which he perceived as Jewish.
That said, Gab does have a very strict policy against using the platform to threaten people or post content that is illegal (like child pornography, video of murders, etc.). In contrast to Dorsey’s platform, Torba’s company issued a statement immediately condemning Bowers while expressing empathy to his victims.
That wasn’t enough, however. Gab was forced offline after its web host, Joyent, gave the platform 48 hours to migrate somewhere else. Meanwhile, domain hosting service GoDaddy also forced Gab to go elsewhere, while it was also dropped by an eCommerce provider.
The point is, Gab is being treated like the terrorist while Twitter gets away with allowing its platform to be abused by a criminal with equally heinous intent. The only thing you could say that separates Sayoc and Bowers is that Sayoc is a lousy bombmaker and didn’t harm anyone.
But is what he used Twitter for – to threaten – any different than what Bowers used Gab for, as a hate-speech vehicle? Both were radicals. Both are criminals. Both abused their social media presence.
Yet only one of them was punished by the Left-wing social, cultural, and media establishment.
Read more about the Left’s out-of-control political correctness at PoliticalCorrectness.news.
Sources include:
Please contact us for more information.
