Misusing The Power Of Social Media

PJ Media posted an article yesterday about a recent statement by Mark Zuckerberg.

The article reports:

During this year’s Aspen Ideas Festival, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg explained that Facebook is increasingly trying to work with governments to determine what political speech it does and does not allow. Oh sorry, I mean: what kind of political ads it is willing to approve.

In the particular example Zuckerberg cited, in 2018, American pro-life groups wanted to run advertisements for Facebook users in Ireland. This is because the Irish were about to vote in a referendum on whether abortion should be legalized.

When Facebook saw the ad requests, the company contacted the Irish government asking whether this should or should not be allowed. “Their response at the time was, ‘we don’t currently have a law, so you need to make whatever decision you want to make.'”

In other words, Facebook could do as it pleased. There was no legal reason to disallow the ads. But what did Facebook do? You guessed it:

“We ended up not allowing the ads.”

When Mark Zuckerberg made this decision, Facebook became a publication–not a platform. The decision was an editorial decision–not a legal decision. The decision was consistent with the political ideology that Facebook has supported in the past. This is the point at which Facebook becomes dangerous. Much of the younger generation gets their news through social media. If Facebook is making editorial decisions based on political ideology, they are not acting as an honest broker of news. Our younger generations are not hearing the complete story–they are hearing a politically biased version–no different from the mainstream media.

There are no laws against Facebook making editorial decisions, but its users need to be aware that they are not getting both sides of any story.

Antisemitism In Ireland

CBN News is reporting today that the “Control of Economic Activity (in) Occupied Territories” bill is making its way through the Irish government.

The article reports:

The proposed law would make it illegal for Irish citizens to buy goods and services from Israeli citizens in what they define as the occupied territories. That would make it illegal to buy an ice cream, a postcard or a bottle of water in the old city of Jerusalem.

…The bill is called the “Control of Economic Activity (in) Occupied Territories”.  If convicted under the bill, an Irish citizen could be fined more than a quarter of a million dollars and spend up to five years in jail.   

…Prof. Kontorovich says Irish leaders may be hesitant to pass the bill.

“One of the only reasons the law has not been passed yet is because the Irish government is properly worried about the consequences it’s going to have for Irish companies doing business in America and many of the large American companies doing business in Ireland like Apple. Because America has strict laws against boycotting Israel,” he explained.

This is simply BDS (Boycott, Divest, and Sanction) on steroids. First of all, there are no ‘occupied territories.’ That is a term invented by Arabs who still want to drive the Jews into the sea. Second of all, this is antisemitism pure and simple. America has laws against boycotting Israel because these boycotts are not morally justified. Israel is the only country in the Middle East that has freedom of religion–Jews, Muslims, and Christians are all free to worship in Israel. Also, a boycott of goods in these areas hurts the Arabs who work there more than it hurts the Israelis. Arabs commute from the Arab territories that have no commerce into Israel where commerce flourishes. When companies in the border areas of Israel close because of boycotts, the Arabs suffer.

These Are The People Who Will Be In Charge Of ObamaCare

Every time someone threatens to cut government spending, big government types begin screaming that spending is already cut to the bone. Well, if that is true, why don’t we just cut government waste and fraud?

Today The Blaze posted a story about some recent tax refunds mailed out by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).

The article reports:

The Internal Revenue Service issued $4 billion in fraudulent tax refunds last year to people using stolen identities, with some of the money going to addresses in Bulgaria, Lithuania and Ireland, according to an inspector general’s report released Thursday.

The IRS sent a total of 655 tax refunds to a single address in Lithuania, and 343 refunds went to a lone address in Shanghai.

Again, 343 payments to one address.

There are certain red flags that result in American taxpayers being audited–a change in giving habits, a drastic change in income, and various other things will set off a flag and result in an audit. Doesn’t the IRS software have the capacity to set off a flag if 343 people have the same address? I realize a large apartment building could easily house 343 people, but wouldn’t they have individual addresses? Shouldn’t that many people at the same address raise a question with someone?

Florida is a prime target for identity theft for the purpose of  tax fraud. The article reports:

Among individual homes, one address in Orlando received 580 tax refunds totaling $870,000 last year, the report said. Another Orlando address received 291 refunds totaling $466,000.

The article reports that the IRS has developed a computer program to deal with the problem of identity theft and false tax returns. Let’s hope it is more secure than the ObamaCare website. Meanwhile, let’s see if we can end enough fraud to help with the budget deficit.

Enhanced by Zemanta