This sounds like an admission of wrongdoing that is worthy of deplatforming, no?

Ever since the asinine violence we witnessed taking place at the Capitol the first week of January we have watched as Democrats and the media go to extreme lengths to tie in anyone and any institution on the right as connected to the violence. Leaps of logic and connections that would not measure up to the definition of ‘’circumstantial’’ have been used to impugn numerous targets as complicit with treason as a result.

This then becomes a serious problem for the biggest social media platform to be found. 

Following the breaching of the Capitol, punishments were handed out in a swift fashion. President Trump found himself completely shut out by the tech giants. The website Parler was completely deplatformed under accusations that the site hosted numerous members of the riot who plotted their attack on its pages. But that being the case, what is to be said of FaceBook declaring it is addressing the very issue of the plotters using its site in the same fashion? 

The Wall Street Journal reports that the social media giant is making platform changes to its site as a result of findings it came up with indicating gatherings of violent groups were indicated on its forums component of the site.

Now the social-networking giant is clamping down on Groups. The effort began after Facebook’s own research found that American Facebook Groups became a vector for the rabid partisanship and even calls for violence that inflamed the country after the election. The changes, which Facebook escalated after the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol, involve overhauling the mechanics of a product that was meant to be central to its future.

This comes across as a rather remarkable piece of admission, given the rabid amount of accusations and overreaction targeted at Parler for its supposed lax treatment of these types of individuals. If Parler is said to be complicit because the Capitol rioters plotted on its pages then how is FaceBook not responsible? As a larger site with far more reach, it has to have, by logic, also fostered its share of reprehensible activity ahead of the attack.

This much has been acknowledged by the internal documents seen by WSJ. They detailed how this was seen as an issue going back to last Autumn. ”The company’s data scientists had warned FaceBook executives in August what they called blatant misinformation and calls for violence were filling the majority of the platform’s ‘civic’ groups.” These groups were said to be centered on politics, and the potential reach on the site for these groups was in the hundreds of millions.

This was something actually seen when Glenn Greenwald looked into the details of those arrested for the insurrection. Greenwald pored through the arrest records and discovered that the bulk of those arrested was not using Parler, and that the majority of the plotting took place on FaceBook. The lack of outrage and blowback is pretty stark. And we have even more evidence to point to showing FaceBook complicity.

The COO of FaceBook, Sheryl Sandberg made an odd distinction in an interview following the riots. While insisting they were not responsible for hosting the plotting on her platform she manages to say that, in truth, there had to have been some taking place.

https://twitter.com/therecount/status/1348721745688211460?s=20

‘’Our enforcement is never perfect, so I’m sure there will still things on FaceBook.’’ She continued to go on claiming that no other platform has their same ability to prevent hate and other objectionable content. This means her contention is that while yes, some of the plotting would have been on their site, since other outlets are not as good at stopping the groups they are not to be held responsible. Pretty convenient when you get to declare levels of guilt concerning yourself and others.

This brings up two interconnected questions. How is Parler held to a higher standard than the larger platforms with a far greater reach, and why is it that those sites now known to host the plotters — FaceBook and Twitter — are not held to any level of responsibility? The accusation that Parler’s guilt justified it becoming completely stripped away from the web only leads to asking, why is it that sites with far more involvement bear zero responsibility?

The arrested individuals were shown to plot on FaceBook, one of the corporate executives admits to activity on her site, and now a report exposes the company is looking to bring an end to the discovered activity that has been declared grounds for complete removal of a competitor. All of which exposes the utter sham that has been taking place for weeks.

Distractions were made as leverage was enforced, and one outlet has become a corporate scapegoat for the guilt displayed by the larger players. This entire enterprise is crooked, and there are signs that the way this played out could lead to trouble down the line for the big tech players.