Politics Video Transcript
Welcome to Truly Right View Politics
Let The Truth Be Told!
Are you ready to hear the real truth unfiltered by bias media or government intervention?
Subscribe to the Truly Right View YouTube Channel
Subscribe to the Truly Right View Rumble Channel
president-elect Donald Trump has now chosen the new head of the FCC and he’s saying he’s going to go after what he refers to as the censorship cartel now look President elect Trump he appointed FCC commissioner Brendan Carr as the next chairman of the agency and this could me changes for big Tech as cars openly stated they’re part of what he refers to as a censorship cartel and something that must be dismantled referring of course to this cartel like group they formed now I’ll be going into his plans for this in today’s episode but let me know your let me know in the comments what you think about this move uh what do you think about his old plan to dismantle the censorship cartel agree disagree let me know now overall what we’re watching with this is potentially a very big shakeup in the tech and media industry because this doesn’t just involve tech companies tied in with this are nonprofit organizations NOS government agencies foreign government agencies and interestingly a lot of big corporate media now in fact post election and Trump Victory right a lot of corporate media are seeing a big slump in ratings as well what people are calling the Donald drain uh they’re not doing so hot I’ll be talking about these stories and others today so let’s dive into it now first off president-elect Donald Trump has now appointed the head of the Federal Communications Commission and has stated plans on again on this individual side to dismantle big Tech so-called censorship cartel now the appointee is Brendan Carr he’s the incoming FCC chairman now his appointment could include actions against big tech companies Google Facebook and so on we’ll see what he does right because he’s he’s actually sent a letter to them directly at this point and the Network that has been reportedly used he claims to facilitate censorship of news outlets independent voices and online speech now Carr is a lawyer and he’s already been a commissioner of the FCC since 2017 he’s already in it right uh he’s the senior Republican there but his appointment to lead the commission overall could actually Mark some big changes free for free speech and for the internet as a whole because how many of you remember how the internet used to be when you could kind of say whatever you wanted and it was an open debate uh and the internet of course had a lot more engagement and then the censorship kicked in and the nature of the internet changed the internet is not the same internet it was in the early 2000s now car gave a hint at some of his initial actions in a post on X let me show you he said this Facebook Google Apple Microsoft and others have played Central roles in the censorship cartel the orwellian named News Guard along with factchecking groups and ad agencies helped enforce one-sided narratives and he says the censorship cartel must be dismantled now on that post he included images of an open letter that he sent to the heads of meta alphabet Inc Microsoft and Apple uh these are companies that together would include Facebook Google YouTube and some of the bigger platforms on the internet as well as the web browsers and here’s what he wrote this is his open letter he said over the past few years Americans have lived through an unprecedented surge of censorship your companies referring to the heads of these companies have played significant roles in the improper conduct big tech companies silenced Americans for doing nothing more than exercising their first amendment rights they targeted core political religious and scientific speech and they worked often in concert with so-called media monitors and others to defund demonetize and otherwise put out of business news outlets and organizations that dared to deviate from an approved narrative now he States Congressional investigations press reports and other evidence show that in many cases you referring to the heads of these companies did not act alone rather you participated in a censorship cartel and this has legal implications which I’ll get into he says you participated in a censorship cartel that included not only technology and social media companies but advertising marketing and so-called factchecking organizations as well as the Biden Harris Administration itself the relevant conduct extended from removing or blocking social media posts to labeling whole websites or apps as untrustworthy or highrisk and an apparent effort to suppress their information and viewpoints including through efforts to delist them lower their rankings or harm their profitability now he notes this censorship cartel and is a front to Americans constitutional freedoms and must be completely dismantled and he adds that Americans must be able to reclaim their right to free speech indeed our democracy depends on freedom of expression now on this it’s important to note that the head of the FCC he does not need to be approved by Congress uh Carr has already previously been confirmed to the Senate right uh so Carr is already now in this position by appointment uh they already approved him again to the FCC and he was appointed from within the FCC to be the head of it in other words so he’s in basically now look on another point the use of the term cartel is actually probably important I would say it’s important because if we go by the Miriam Webster dictionary a cartel on the business side because they have a political definition as well and he’s referring to the business side a cartel is defined as quote a combination of independent commercial or Industrial Enterprises designed to limit competition or fix prices now what does it mean if you want to limit competition and fix prices why is that important well the reason that’s legally important the language he’s using here at least in my take is that could be illegal this could refer to illegal business practices and in particular this could be a violation of antitrust laws the whole network of companies groups and individuals could be implicated for their Collective involvement because look it’s illegal for companies to create monopolies through conspiracies this ties into the Sherman Antitrust Act and here’s what the Department of Justice says on this right this is the actual Anti-Trust laws on the Justice website they say the Sherman Act also makes it illegal to monopolize conspire to monopolize or attempt to monopolize a market for products or Services an unlawful Monopoly exists when one firm has Market power for a product or service and it has obtained or maintained that market power not through competition on the merits but because the firm has suppressed competition by engaging in anti-competitive conduct monopolization offenses may be prosecuted criminally or civil now look of course it could be suggested that corporate media entities in particular have been maintaining a monopoly on a product or service not through competition on the Merit because they’re just competing on the marketplace but because these companies have suppressed competition by engaging in anti-competitive conduct now look we’ll see if you know any violations ever get officially named uh but I think this actually could be important just going by the language of it in my interpretation it’s also possible we could see other violations on this it might not be limited to this Trump himself has actually named and listed several possible charges to go after what he also called the censorship cartel now Carr this new appointee he has already initiated investigations into these big tech companies he’s already seemingly engaging in this right and he’s looking into their involvement with what he describes as a censorship cartel he’s asking about their involvement notably with a company called newsguard now newsguard rates news and information websites and here’s what car States in his letter to the heads of these companies these big tech companies he says for now I’m writing to obtain information from you that can inform the fcc’s work to promote free speech and diversity of viewpoints as you know big Tech’s prized liability Shield section 230 is codified in the communications act which the FCC administers he’s going to be overseeing this in other words and he says as relevant here section 230 only confers benefits on big tech companies when they operate in the words of the statute in good good faith and he said it is in this context that I’m writing to obtain information about your work with one specific organization the orwellian name newsguard as exposed by the Twitter files which again was the files after Elon Musk bought Twitter uh they found all these communications where Twitter employees had been communicating with various organizations and government entities on how to censor people they had you know basically whole lists of people who they regarded as the spreaders of misinformation and disinformation and even suppressed what turned out to be a lot of true information right that was the Twitter files and he says this as exposed by the Twitter files newsguard bills itself as the internet’s Arbiter of Truth and as its co-founder put it vaccine against misinformation and he notes that News Guard reports to rate the credibility of news and information outlets and tells readers and advertisers which Outlets they can trust as the US committee on small business 2024 staff report stated quote these things combined with nudes guard’s vast partnership in the advertising space select winners and losers in the news media space and he notes that newsg guard does so by leveraging its Partnerships with advertising agencies to effectively censor targeted news outlets in other words putting news outlets out of business if they don’t play the game that’s the allegation it seems now car goes further on this noting as well have this organization that rates news sites and again has these relations with all these different companies and also has relations with the advertising side right that the allegation is they can again pick the winners and losers now he notes that it allegedly does this to the extent that it can actually impact their advertising then also with ties these big tech companies managed to censor them in other ways now his note about section 23 is also important though now this is section 230 of the communications act in this regard that’s important because what he’s suggesting is that their legal protections these big tech companies their legal protections under Section 230 could be revoked depending on their involvement with this network and he goes on to explain how some of their other products also tie in with his Network including with their web browsers because again he’s naming these head he’s writing this directly to the heads these major companies a lot of them have major web browsers and they also have ties to some of the biggest social media platforms and also with artificial intelligence which is now feeding into the search results on various search engines and also creating the basis of a lot of research that’s being done online meaning that if you centralize that and if you cut out certain voices you can essentially maintain a singular worldview and cut out everybody else right that’s the allegation here now car states of these big tech companies in other words in his exact words in other words your products may use News Guard or you may or or you may enable your customers to use News Guard and then comes an interesting allegation right in terms of this where He suggests that this may be a violation of section 230 and what does that mean well look this could cause these big tech companies to to lose their legal protection meaning they could be sued by users meaning they could possibly face other types of charges and face charges in lawsuits in ways that they’ve been protected from up until now this is the open letter again he says but newsg guard’s own track record raises questions about whether relying on the organization’s products would constitute good faith actions within the meaning of section 230 now remember he noted that the legal implication of section 230 only holds if the companies do this in good faith and if they violate the good faith element then they could lose illegal protections and he’s suggesting that their relationship with this company could be could actually make them lose it on the grounds that they lack good faith that’s what he’s suggesting here now Carr explains some of the other topics that News Guard has checked and penalized right uh including of websites report on the covid-19 lab leak Theory and other topics and again you know they were engaged in censoring a lot of information that is debatable at the very least and sometimes actually turned out to be true in the long run now he notes the organization is an ongoing subject of Investigation by the US House committee on oversight and accountability for potential impacts on free speech so the fcc’s involvement of this is one kind of COG in a machine looking into what they’re defining as a censorship cartel and then Carr goes on to ask these big tech companies for information interestingly relating to any type of involvement with newsguard including on the service side the customer side and the advertising side because he’s again alleging that they have ties in with all these big advertising companies and he also ask for information on any third-party advertising or marketing agencies they’re working with now look my take this is potentially going to be very big because again right this could tie to Anti-Trust violations civil and even you know again direct lawsuits right uh this could be really serious people could go to jail for this potentially in terms of how he’s defining it it could also Le these big tech companies to lose their legal protections under Section 230 and then be able to be sued by users it also seems this agenda could be on the plate for the in coming Trump Administration as well uh because again they’re talking about that one of the key issues around Carr Brendan Carr right he actually wrote the FCC chapter on policy recommendations in the project 2025 report that news out has been going on about right uh this is chapter 28 of that report and here’s what he wrote in it for the FCC this is Project 2025 the actual document policy priorities for the FCC it says the FCC needs to change course and bring new urgency to achieving four main goals reigning in big Tech promoting National Security unleashing economic prosperity and ensuring FCC accountability and good governance now in that report he actually recommends eliminating the immunities that courts added to section 230 uh which he describes are actually very Broad and very vague uh basically these big te companies because of the broad and vague definitions of legal immunities they get they’re immune to a lot of legal oversight basically uh they’re not really able to be held accountable on many fronts he’s arguing and notably he also calls to improve transparency rules on big Tech including on how they can ban people how they restrict people how they shadowban people how they downrank people or websites or news agencies because they’re doing this in ways that don’t really have transparency and he’s again suggesting these could be possible violations of the law maybe uh but again we’ll have to see now he also talks about going after Tik Tock rooting out the role of China Telecom within some us companies this is interesting because you know for Trump he seems to not really be on board with Banning Tik Tok the new FCC appointee Brendan Carr who’s now in uh he is talking about in it at least he was in the project 2025 report it’s not clear if he’s going to maintain that position now that he’s in uh but it does seem the Big Goal though is to break the monopolies that have been taking over the internet and the information space you know the issue that a lot of us have seen is that competition is very difficult on the internet if you want to start a new company if you want to start a blog or a news media it’s actually very hard to compete because private companies have become The Gatekeepers and these Gatekeepers they collude with each other in a lot of ways if you don’t play by their rules if you don’t repeat their narratives if you violate it by saying something controversial you get cancelled you get deplatformed you get demonetized and your entire business plan is now gone they can destroy you right and so this is one of the big issues they can cause you a lot of harm we watched this happen does anybody remember the the website parlor parlor was a social media website uh after the after January 6 actually when again Twitter uh took Trump off the platform remember that Twitter Twitter again kicked Trump off the platform a lot of users migrated to parlor parlor was the upand cominging social media website parlor just exploded in growth and then what happened different tech companies colluded with each other and they took it off their you know app stores they went after the server side of it going after the actual survivability of the website itself they started going after it in the news media attacking it saying that it was you know the the one that helped people organized for January 6th and they colluded to destroy a business they destroyed parlor using this entire system of control now what’s interesting was that did not happen through the government it wasn’t like you know law enforcement agencies investigated parlor and you know went after them criminally it was businesses corporations and the individuals that control the voices of media and information that attacked and destroyed a company politically right we all watch this in other ways we watched what happened with a lot of online influencers and Independent Media starting from around 2016 remember what happened in 2016 when When Donald Trump won the election the first time a lot of news outet Ste back and said what did we do wrong because Hillary Clinton was by a large margin projected to be the winner in 2016 uh when she did not win a lot of news outlets question well what did we get wrong is our polling wrong do we not understand readers what did we do now they began doing a little bit of soul searching and that lasted a very short while then they flipped and said the the reason we got it wrong the reason people voted the way they did was not because of wrongdoing on our part It’s because they’ve been radicalized by online influencers which they then called you know the alt-right and they came up with all these names for them and conspiracy theorists and everything else then they started eliminating these groups from the internet they started demonetizing the platforming online influencers they started cancelling people on their YouTube channels they went after the adver iing and you know uh many of them even got demonetized on these platforms like YouTube and such they went after entire media companies and what they did was is used these systems hit pieces and news outlets to go after the advertisers colluding in some ways on these disinformation and factchecking platforms and they destroyed their competition how many of you used to watch somebody on YouTube or Twitter or Facebook or whatever else back in like 2015 2016 who was now no longer there how many of you know somebody like that who you used to watch and got kicked off the internet basically because they said the wrong thing there’s a lot of them even the average users experienced this for example when they had online forums Reddit Facebook and so on a lot of people used to have communities and even these communities got shut down in many regards and then we watched something else we watched the rise of so-called fact Checkers a lot of news outlets began factchecking initiatives third-party factchecking initiatives started up and we’ve been seeing a global system now emerging that is actively trying to control Free Speech now like in America of course we have the First Amendment the Constitution protects our rights to free speech but because of this alleged know censorship cartel a network of private businesses organizations uh you know news outlets in some instances Nos and sometimes even foreign governments where they don’t have the Constitution protecting Free Speech they’ve been colluding with each other to get around the constitutional rights of Americans it’s not being done through the government if the government did it it would be a violation of the Constitution here but private businesses working in collaboration with each other have been carrying this out now this has always been legally questionable uh this has been again one of the big arguments uh which is basically can can government censor you indirectly can they censor you through roundabout means If instead of censoring you directly they merely inform a platform like Twitter or X now or something like that like we saw with the Twitter files um which is again what was revealed in both the Facebook files and the Twitter files can a government agency have an open communication line or a government official to individuals at these platforms and then inform them of issues with certain users and certain speech and certain narratives and so on not telling them to censor technically but opening up this channel in such a way that it suggests these individuals should be censored and that eventually does lead to these narratives you know even individual post and sometimes even whole individuals being censored on the internet that has always been a legal question we could soon get the answers on that and even bigger than this if it turns out that these organizations have been working in conjunction with each other you could again see possible antitrust law violations and possibly I would say even racketeering violations if they’re working in a conspiracy amongst each other to carry this out but again you’d have to see Communications demonstrating that they were working in collaboration with the goal to violate a law in this case possible antitrust laws or something else and also the big important question on this going forward is going to be just how extensive was this system just how big is it is it maybe it’s a conspiracy maybe it’s all in our imaginations right uh maybe these organizations have been legitimately going after Bad actors that’s a total possibility but we’re going to get answers on it we’re going to find out who was involved how it was operated and whether these actions do or do not violate the law that is the nature of the investigations that have now begun and interestingly as well this could spell some bad news for the big corporate media if censorship goes away if platforms like search engines and social media websites stop giving preferential treatment to the media if if you know advertisers cannot be stopped or pressured or attacked in ways that prevent them from placing ads with the competitors of the big corporate media which happens right now by the way then what does this mean well look what this will mean is that all these big news outlets the entire corporate media landscape they will lose the preferential treatment they’ve been enjoying and that also means something all those big news outlets will be forced to compete on the same playing field as everybody else they’ve been playing a rigged game they’ve been playing a game where they get one set of rules and everybody else has another set of rules they get again the search engine results they get uh preferential treatment on social media in many instances they get the advertisers their competitors are denied those things and they’re still surviving somehow right now interestingly imagine what that would look like if those preferential treatments they’re getting were just swept out from under them and they were on the same Level Playing Field well look even with all those preferential treatments a lot of these news outlets are already not doing well for example MSNBC they’re seeing a rating slump right now of 54% post Trump election and it’s actually getting worse now because the morning Joe host actually met went and met with Trump and that caused a big Exodus from their viewers as well now they lost already more than half Their audience compared to their October numbers same with CNN CNN lost 36% of their viewership compared to their October numbers in the days following the election uh they’re calling this the Donald drain for corporate media now again we’ll see if that continues as a bit of context to this you saw a similar issue after Biden won the election and a lot of of conservative news OTS begin losing viewers because people become demoralized like I don’t want to watch the news now you saw the same thing happen on the other side and a lot of them bounced back we’ll see if this continues right now on this note though CNN has announced new transformation plans including large scale layoffs dropping some of its key hosts AP they’re now cutting 8% of their staff Los Angeles Times They just replaced their board on grounds that their board was disconnected from voters Washington Post you know they refused to endorse a candidate for the 2024 elections and you know good for them for being moderate right but that caused some real problems with subscribers and staff they had a mass Exodus and as this has all been happening uh you know Doge pointy VC ramaswami he bought a 7.7% activist stake in BuzzFeed and the list goes on like this interestingly also one of the other things you have with these big corporate media is they also maintain a Pudo Monopoly when it comes to who gets access to the government if you want to get get into the briefings for example uh the White House Press briefings or the Pentagon press briefings or the state department press briefings and so on this is not actually open to everybody there’s a group of organizations many of them including big Cor corporate media control it and so what they will do is try to keep individuals they do not want out of it and of course also the way it’s set up is they get preferential treatment when they raise their hands and get called on for questions if you’re in the one of the standing areas used to be that you didn’t really get called on as much that’s changing a bit Trump is saying he’s going to overturn that as well and he’s going to start letting in independent journalists podcasters YouTubers and others into these briefings which again has been limited until now to basically a handpicked group of media which is selected by a group controlled by many of these same media they had a monopoly on it now across the board because the list of you know organizations are now facing big shakeups like this it just goes on and on what we’re watching right now is a very large shakeup in the entire news industry and this hasn’t even factored in the likely up coming impact when these companies are going to have to compete on equal ground with independent news outlets which does seem to be the trajectory and that until now been effectively surviving in a denied environment a lot of independent journalists a lot of Independent Media they’ve been surviving with almost no advertising they’ve been surviving with almost no you know search results on Google or other websites because a lot of them get down ranked and again the Corp corporate media tend to get preferential treatment they’ve been surviving in an environment where they don’t have access to the advertising agencies and so on they’ve survived despite all of that and a lot of them even in addition to surviving have actually managed to do pretty dang well even with censorship and demonetization and everything else right what’s going to happen when these individuals who’ve been kind of like living in the wild are able to be on the same level play field is everybody else and what’s going to happen to the people who’ve been eating their caviar and you know sipping their wine and have never had to compete like this it’s going to be interesting folks and also interestingly as well advertisers could be facing some problems Elon Musk for example because I mentioned this is one Cog in a machine you have this type of shift happening from multiple directions Elon Musk with his platform X he’s now suing streaming platform twitch for allegedly conspiring to boycott advertisements on his social media platform X I’ll be talking more about this after come back from a quick break I’ll be back in less than a minutes so don’t go anywhere experts agree one of the best ways to protect against Financial uncertainty is to diversify your portfolio learn how physical gold and silver can secure your retirement funds from today’s economic challenges with a gold Ira from American Hartford gold you can Safeguard your wealth with no penalties or taxes when you transfer your current qualifying retirement accounts call now and our precious metals Specialists will send you a free information kit no cost or obligation American Hartford gold a trusted industry leader with an A+ from the Better Business Bureau has a five-star rating from thousands of happy clients whether you are getting physical precious metals in a gold Ira or delivered to your doorstep we offer only the highest quality gold and silver for your peace of mind we also offer a no fee buyback commitment a low price guarantee along with free shipping and free insurance so don’t wait call the number on your screen today and secure your financial [Music] future welcome back what’s being referred to as the censorship cartel could soon be coming to an end now we could see a huge shakeup in the entire news and big tech industry as president-elect Donald Trump is named FCC commissioner Brendan Carr as the next head of the agency he doesn’t need to be approved by the Senate he’s already in because again this is just an appointee it’s also not just news or Tech and other things and advertisers also this is something that’s going to impact probably the whole industry and on the advertising front we’re seeing another another shift take place from a different direction Elon Musk for example he’s now suing streaming platform twitch for allegedly consp iring to boycott advertisements on his social media platform X and this is actually part of a broader lawsuit that he currently has on alleged Anti-Trust violations and remember that word Anti-Trust because you’re probably going to be hearing a lot of it going forward this is the glob in mail they say Elon musk’s X has added live streaming service twitch to its lawsuit claiming dozens of companies conspired with an advertising industry group to boycott the social media platform X causing it to lose revenue and it’s it’s the original August lawsuit accus the World Federation of advertisers CVS Health candy maker Mars and danish Renewable Energy company or ored of conspiring along with others to withhold quote billions of dollars in advertising revenue from X previously known as Twitter after musk bought the company and notes as well the original August lawsuit accused the World Federation of advertisers CVS Health candy maker and danish maker uh candy maker again on this and know said after it notes as well now that twitch and its parent company Amazon did not immediately respond to a request for comment and neither did X and notes also the World Federation of advertisers launched an initiative in 2019 to quote help the industry address the challenge of illegal or harmful content content on digital platforms and its monetization via advertising a public statement to go after the advertis advertisements on Platforms in other words and interestingly it seems that some of the some of them have already appeared to be dropping this boycott a lot of these companies are backing out of this entire initiative and there beginning to put their ads back on these platforms The Blaze has this bigname brands have ended their advertising boycott against Elon musk’s X after approximately a year of refusing to support the platform Comcast Discovery Disney IBM Lion’s gate entertainment and Warner Bros have resumed their ad spending on X with musk thanking CEO Linda Yaro again on X for her work on bringing the companies back onto his platform and it doesn’t seem that we’re on the brink it sorry it does seem we’re on the brink of a big shift in the entire media landscape and with free speech overall uh Free Speech seems to be back on the menu right and this is going to be a big a big issue as well because a question is going to be what will be the fate of news outlets and organizations that have been able to barely survive while maintaining monopolies that created an uneven playing field now right they could start having to play on the same grounds as everybody else else they could face lawsuits potentially uh over their involvement in this but even beyond the lawsuits what is going to happen when they’ve been barely surviving even with all these benefits and then suddenly all these other people they’ve been suppressing are able to compete with them on an even playing field this is potentially what we’re going to now watch take place and folks that said leave your questions or comments in the chat hit the like button button helps us a lot and that said let’s jump into some questions let’s see here I see Seymour buts is back in the chat welcome back Seymour um Idaho rocks you’re saying I’ve often wondered how fake news can catch hold so easily in this information AIDS when communication is so fast and easy the answer is sensorship of Truth you know this is something I’ve been thinking about because you know there’s an AR ment going around that you know we shouldn’t allow hateful speech on the internet and if you allow people to say anything people are going to say all kinds of crazy things uh it’s going to be chaos you’re going to have people spreading all these false narratives and so on I’ve been thinking about that I I think on one part we do we do have some legal legal barriers on speech uh for example if you defame somebody uh if you commit Lial you know the these are violations of free speech uh you actually can face legal charges if you do that uh the individual who was harmed by that can sue you for it for a lot of money actually as we’ve seen some of the big lawsuits and so actual harmful speech is already illegal and and this has long been recognized in the United States uh a person cannot make false statements that will harm you as an individual they they can’t defame you in things like that right big compan there’s even some anti-competitive you know laws that will prevent companies from saying things to harm their competitors uh even sometimes when true you know there there’s limits on Advertising with this for example there are some limits as well uh there are limits as well if you make threatening statements like if you threaten to kill somebody I I can tell you as a uh as a journalist actually if people threatening to kill you other than getting like uh I I know people who dealt with a lot of this other than getting like uh getting a court order to make it so they can’t come close to you like there’s not much you can do about it actually even that is debatable to some extent but you know one of the big debates around free speech in general is what happens when people can just say whatever they want when there’s no more taboo topics uh when people you know one of the big arguments they’re questioning the Holocaust for example they’re they’re talking about this issue or that issue which are which is not normally something that’s you know tolerated in terms of debate right what happens when you start having this not be censored anymore well in my opinion and I’d say this is in line with you know with the original idea of how the founding fathers viewed free speech is I believe in the marketplace of ideas and the marketplace of ideas what does it mean it means that when you express an opinion it is now open for debate I don’t think censoring people is going to change their minds I think actually what we’ve seen is this this is what we’ve witnessed let’s be honest with ourselves right this is what we’ve witnessed when people are censored what do they do they go to tribes they go to micro communities like you know uh smaller groups of people who believe the exact same thing they do and there’s nothing challenging their beliefs anymore they feed each other in other words and those beliefs there’s no opposing arguments anymore they become entrenched without open debate you can’t explain to somebody the facts that would make them understand that maybe something’s not true or something is true right uh without open debate you really can’t you really can’t refine truth and I think that’s going to be one of the big issues that we’re going to see if Free Speech comes back if somebody posts something on the Internet and they’re denying something happened or they’re saying something happened you know covid-19 and the vaccine safety stuff that was a big debate we had for example that was suppressed uh I believe that if you’re able to have an actual debate without censorship the truth will emerge from that debate that is how the marketplace of ideas was supposed to function now again uh my personal take is I don’t I don’t think censorship actually stops people from believing false ideas I think it institutionalizes it because once you lose discussion people kind of go crazy when they get to into their own heads uh once they start talking to other people they might realize okay that idea is kind of that idea is a little off you know what I mean um I think it’s healthy to have debate I think it’s healthy to have discussion and when people get used to not having any of their ideas ever challenged and they start getting really insane ideas then that’s when they get dangerous that’s when you start getting people who will attack you if you question them right which which we see happening right now uh a lot of organizations and groups will like viciously attack you uh if you question their worldview or their ideology because again they’re not used to that debate we’ve gotten rid of the culture of debate let’s see here Anthony Evelyn you’re saying what should be done with Tik Tock how can the incoming Administration deal with it I I know I know people have different ideas on Tik tock on a personal note my personal view I believe Tik Tok should be banned I I believe that it is I believe it has a harmful algorithm and I believe the Chinese Communist party’s involvement with it has manufactured it that way uh case in point the CCP they have a different version of it allowed in China and the algorithms for the West actually do facilitate a lot of harmful content whereas the algorithms in China actually facilitate a lot of you know not harmful content uh I believe that Tik Tok is is actually dangerous I I think it’s actually damaging and I think it’s harmful especially to kids you know kids are using it and it start it starts feeding them like Pro suicide content kids start using it and they start getting Tik Tock challenges on stealing cars and then driving recklessly and then crashing them I’m naming actual things on Tik Tok now the issue is nothing you see on these platforms is by chance it’s curated the algorithms create it and so if you have an algorithm that’s feeding people that stuff you should look into it it I I I think you should really look into it you know and I and I think that’s what we’re seeing happen with some of the federal investigations I I I I think the Chinese Communist party has nefarious motives uh when it comes to their agendas against the United States and so I would be very cautious with that that said um yeah yeah Troy Troy and M yeah it it was it’s actually one of the Tik Tock challenges I can’t remember the exact make of the car but there’s a Tik Tock challenge where they teach you how to steal certain models of cars and they challenge you to steal the car uh using this method where you can like Hotwire it and then crash it and then film it and then post it on Tik Tok it’s an this is an actual Tik Tok challenge this is real you know what I mean it’s crazy now that being said I think the Chinese Communist party’s involvement on the internet and within entertainment overall should be looked at uh I think for example Chinese big tech companies buying up all the video game companies that should be looked at as a monopoly and that should be looked at as maybe foreign uh you know for foreign involvement why they’re doing it uh the Chinese Communist party’s censorship of Hollywood should be looked at uh Chinese te China Telecom as Brendan Carr noted in the project 2025 document should be looked at uh companies selling data to Chinese AI companies and in particular selling access to cloud computing platforms to China should be looked at CCP involvement with a lot of us big Tech platforms should be looked at including when big Tech platforms including some of the major you know companies actually even work with Chinese law enforcement where where they will give personal data to them if they make uh you know requests on it that should be looked at and they’ve even gone out some companies have actually been involved in Chinese the CCP going after like democracy activists and you know religious Believers and stuff some of that is happened it’s not talked about much but this has actually happened platforms that work with the Chinese Communist party or have allowed Chinese companies to have like majority stakes in them that should be looked at as well there are actually some big platforms other than Tik Tok that have similar data or you know shareholder agreements with the Chinese Communist Party or its companies this is a broader picture I I think Tik Tock is is one of the bigger pieces of this but I think Tik Tock is uh Tik Tock is is the tip of the iceberg in terms of the ccp’s incursion into the tech space in the west it it’s it’s a small part of the big picture of what they’re doing and and I would regard all of that as being a security issue not not to mention their involvement with like 5G Towers in the US and stuff you know Chinese 5G uh CCP involvement in you know building it for example Subway systems which have a lot of sensors the involvement the train systems which have a lot of sensors all this stuff should be looked at I would say um but but again Tik Tock is like the first step in that right Tik Tock is like uh is like the the head of the battering ram you know on you have to get that through first Vegas woman 702 you’re saying no transparency equals not in good faith and I and I would agree actually you know the old internet culture you know let’s go back to like 2006 to 2010 any of you remember what the internet was like back then the internet culture was all about uh information wants to be free that was the big slogan on the internet information wants to be free and they were pushing for transparency uh you had the beginning of what they called like you know social media influencers you had the beginning of what they called citizen journalists Twitter at the time facilitated the you know the creation of basically people coming online and recording from battlefields on you know different parts of the world or posting documents and things like this that were just causing huge shakeups corruption was getting exposed you had group movements like the Arab Spring where people actually coordinated like social movements in countries uh which were going against corruption people were exposing this stuff you had a lot of things like that Occupy Wall Street uh in the US was like that as well although I know there’s mixed views on that because that turned into other movements you actually had uh the internet changing a lot of things because it was a free a free speech space then what happened foreign governments began cracking down on it because they said it’s a danger right uh you had with the Arab Spring for example countries that were shutting off the internet because they deemed that people again you know organizing protests on the internet was a threat to their power you had for example some of the people who were pushing for transparency of information suddenly facing legal attacks and maybe frame Being Framed for crimes in different parts of the world uh this was the shakeup that took place on the part of the software movements you had the open source movement and people were trying to replace software you know because you know back then if you bought something you owned it if you bought a movie you owned it you had you bought it you physically had it nobody could take it from you you could resell it you could let your friend borrow it that was the culture then it became subscription based you know you don’t really own any digital Assets in fact even in California law now they’ve made it so that companies actually have to tell you that when you buy a streaming product like you you know you buy an online video game or a movie you don’t actually own it anymore you don’t own it you’re you’re borrowing it basically now that was foreseen and so you had movement start up called the uh the open- source movement where people began creating among coders and you know UI developers and stuff replacement software for all the major systems they had replacements for Microsoft Word like open office or Libra office they had Replacements to some of the big web browsers actually initially Firefox was like that even though they become kind of a big company themselves now uh you had again the um the Linux movement to create alternative uh operating systems to Windows or Apple OS right iOS and so on they had all those things start up then what happened a lot of the big tech companies got involved in the open- source movement and they began suing them for using parts of their code or they started going after them for you know saying that they’re violating intellectual property rights and so on like that and the open- source movement kind of is now limited uh there are some limits on how you can use it with licensing and everything else the open source movement was kind of crushed in other words that then created what was called the free software movement which then started creating basically the same thing creating free software that would go against the open- source movement because people were taking code and putting it in there and then violating you know uh copyright laws and stuff the free software one tried to fix that they got crushed and so now we’re living with an internet where everything is centralized we’re living with an internet now where you don’t really have free speech I mean you do in some corners but you have to find it like hey Case in point case in point right uh you all being here um you know we’re living in in an Internet space where search engines advertising uh you know preferential treatment on you know again in a lot of places it it’s centralized you you have kind of a centralized group of companies that have been recognized and deemed as trustworthy ironically by organizations that they have either been part of forming or formed themselves and not to mention the issue of globalized law where you know a judge in a random country in you know some part of the world can sue an American company and actually dictate the free speech of people in the United States from the other side of the world we’re watching this happen you’re watching compan companes getting sued American companies getting sued or you know fined not even sued but fined by Foreign governments all throughout Europe right now uh because they violate some kind of like law that random ex country created and they’re using it to go after an American company for like hundreds of millions of dollars on a rolling basis you’re you’re having you’re having this get destroyed basically um some of you are asking about EP times yeah Epic Times is a good example you know we’re independent as you know uh you might notice we don’t have a lot of ads uh as you know I would like to change that I I it would be great if we get some more advertisements but uh you know we we ourselves have experienced a lot of censorship as well and you know again we’re mostly financed by uh subscribers folks like yourselves you know it’s how it’s how we’ve managed to exist and um this has kind of been the en environment is you do have kind of an Al the alternate web still you do have alternate platforms you do have independent voices you do have all the things that that the internet used to stand for right you still do have that but they’re existing in a denied environment like they’re struggling to survive and they’re fighting for survival all the time uh because of all these different attacks um it’s it’s a very it’s been very difficult but what what’ll be interesting is if that whole thing kind of gets overturned and what the internet used to be and was supposed to represent this kind of global Marketplace for business and Global Marketplace for ideas can return I think it’d be fantastic um on that note too I actually do agree with some of the laws coming out of Europe right now especially when it comes to restrictions on on data GA on data Gathering I think actually they’re doing a good thing uh because I I don’t agree with the type of data Gathering a lot of these websites conduct I I think that’s also very nefarious and I think I think it lends to a possible totalitarian result uh I think if companies stop collecting data on users to the extent that they do that’s fantastic and so you know good on Europe for that I fully support them on that personally uh but you know we’ll see where that goes right James Dyson you’re saying how about the fact Checker Checker Checker maybe we need that you know I mean and and that’s one of the issues right uh let’s put it this way is it really a fact Checker if the fact Checker is run by a business that can lie itself who’s the say the fact Checker is not lying for corporate interest you know if um if if a bank for example is running a banking operation and they create an auditing organization that only goes after rival Banks would that be legal right so why is it that a media organization that creates a factchecking operation that only goes after rival media is deemed okay uh we see that right and you know what they do as well is a lot of these media lie through their teeth a lot of news outlets the big corporate media they have false stories all the time and they get disproven all the time but their definition of true and false is just based on stuff that deviates from what they’re saying and so if you don’t say what they say they fact check you based on their factchecking system and then they use the factchecking system that they run and operate to protect them their narratives which are often false ironically uh but then also to even deny and go after and demonetize and deplatform competitors who say something different I I I think it’s terrible what they’re doing frankly um you and again you also have just third-party organizations which are deeply partisan aligned with political agendas that run these types of operations and they just go after people that have different political opinions things that are debatable right uh you know and and that’s one of the issues too is that sometimes with news the true story is not is not immediately available you know uh case in point remember the remember the hunter Biden laptop it’s a great story right Hunter Biden laptop gets released a group of intelligence off or former intelligence officials release a public letter saying this looks like Russian disinformation all the media comes together and says you know intelligence officials say this is Russian disinform they use that to impact the elections and then big tech companies even deplatform entire news websites that were reporting on it remember uh Zero Hedge got attacked on that New York Post got attacked on that uh they actually suffered from some of these platforms because they dared report on it and so Not only was it that they were fact checked and so their entire business Enterprise was attacked through alternative means because they reported on that then what happened well it turned out that the thing was real that the laptop was real the information was real and people lied about it or or just gave a false opinion which was taken as an unquestionable truth you know what do you do in situations like that um you know when I of course was doing some reporting about you know I I get myself in some hot water sometimes but where where do I start I’ve reported on a lot of things that people at first said were false that later turned out to be true and during the interum period of that um sometimes like one year or two years I get attacked like crazy you know the issue is if I were to want to sue websites for defaming me you know you basically statute of limitations is like a year at least in New York but what about when it takes two years for the truth to to come out and it turns out I was right the entire time that’s happened to me on multiple occasions uh you know that that’s one of the issues and so they’ll censor me and they’ll de demonetize me for example for stating true information but the things that I state are not proven or acknowledged to be true by everybody else until two or 3 years later you know that that’s one of the challenges and you know I mean I’m not bitter about it but I think I think in terms of I I don’t I I don’t care whether people believe me initially as long as they believe me eventually you know I play the long game you know what I mean um and that’s that’s what matters to me but I think when they restrict you and try to destroy you for speaking the truth that’s where I draw the line and and I think that’s the line that’s been crossed with these types of systems and not to mention the fact that I think it actually restricts legitimate journalism because journalists journalists because of this nature of regulation of speech are less willing I think to say things that go against the grain if you question the prevailing narratives right if you if you question the prevailing narratives if you say something contrary to what everybody else is saying you risk losing your business right your livelihood could be destroyed and you know we’ve SE we’ve seen that happen to a lot of people actually I think what that does it it conditions people to self-censor you know I was I was actually listening to uh Joe Rogan uh actually on my way to work this morning and he was talking about this with the the guy from Black Rifle Coffee Company it was it was a very interesting discussion because he was talking about this kind of censorship structure and how it works and how it does that that it encourages people to kind of self-censor and you know that that’s not that’s not a healthy State especially when the self-censorship has corporate interests and political interests in such a way that it will damage the Rival corporate interests or the Rival political viewpoints which are debatably valid right I I don’t think that’s a a healthy place for our society to be personally the freeze Zone you’re saying what makes you or anyone else think that Trump’s last term will be any different what I mean you think the Dems are going to go after Trump less or even more yeah I know what you mean and I’ve been thinking about this as well you’re already seeing it start actually there’s been public reporting now back in 2016 kind of the Democrat establishment their their challenge to Trump was a lot of social movements they were organizing Mass protests and you know the pink hat movement thing and then you had black lives matter and protest movements on the streets and they were egging it on then you had the sanctuary cities come up and the migrant Caravans and you had the Trump Russia Scandal which Trump was battling as a dire Administration they tried impeaching him like and they had every if you remember it was like every month there was a new hitpiece narrative oh Trump overfed the koi fish in Japan and he’s killing the koifish when he met with President AB in Japan which which turned out to be false of course they they doctored the footage and they falsified it oh Trump is going to cause global nuclear war because he called Kim Jong-un Rocket Man remember that and then like next thing you know he’s like walking across the DMZ with Kim Jong-un and he G it’s Trump you know you know that Trump actually gave Kim Jong-un a a single of the song Rocket Man by Elton John when when he went there you know stuff like that um you know that happened folks that happened but you know on on the legal attack front yeah I don’t think it’s going to be any different they’re already starting it and they’re they’re saying it publicly the approach they’re going to be taking this time is not going to be protesting on the streets the approach they’re taking this time is at the state level they’re going to be looking at state level push back against you know carrying out the agenda and they’re going to be looking at lawsuits and so they’re they’re going to be filing a lot of lawsuits and civil rights claims and that kind of stuff and the other side with this you know America is is set up very interestingly the founding fathers I think were very smart uh because we have divisions of power at multiple levels you can control the entire federal government Republicans technically now control the entire federal government Republicans control the house the Senate the executive branch and the Judiciary they control it all that does not mean they’re going to be able to do everything they want because you also have divisions of power at the state level you have divisions of Power with elected prosecutors Das you have divisions of powers with the sheriffs who are elected officials and can just choose to not enforce laws that they believe are unconstitutional you have divisions of power uh also within the different levels of Judges where you actually have federal judges all across the country tons of them who can actually have power to stop presidential actions remember we saw that happen when Trump was President last time he would try to initiate something that’s like oh a federal judge in Hawaii blocked it and then you know it takes two three years to go through the courts to be challenged and so on like we we saw that over and over again now I do think there were going to be a lot I think I think we’re going to see the same thing I I think we’re going to see state level lawsuits we’re going to see Civil Rights group lawsuits we’re going to see a lot of Judges file injunctions to stop even maybe executive actions or Congressional you know legislation and so on you’re going to be watching all of this and it is true that that will prevent probably some things from being implemented that Trump and you know the Republicans mostly want I I know this may sound controversial but I don’t think that’s a bad thing I actually think that the divisions of powers are a healthy thing to have in place for this country uh and because I think it’s something that that we support when it’s in our interests and I think eliminating that would be more problematic than allowing it to be there uh point is how many of you here who maybe you know wanted Kamala to win would have wanted Trump to be able to do this and how many of you who wanted Trump to win would have wanted Kamala to have the power to do whatever she wanted without being challenged by the states or federal judges um I think I think those checks on power are actually a good thing and you know again the way it’s set up is it can be challenged still right uh I think we’re going to watch we’re going to be watching a lot of legal battles and that is the way it’s going to unfold it is true this isn’t going to like cart blanch and Trump can just do whatever he wants right as as the free zone notes we will watch a lot of this get challenged that’s the reality of it um but we will be seeing uh we will be seeing a lot going on and the other side of it too this is going to be the other big piece in this is the shift within the justice system where when Trump was President I mean most of his former team was criminally investigated many of them were criminally charged some people went to prison already you’re going to be watching that go the other way and they’re going to be looking at the prosecutors and the da and the federal law judges possibly and their involvement with light on crime policies even opening them up to Legal attacks and lawsuits from Individual Americans you’re going to be watching a lot of people get fired you’re going to be watching a lot of them get replaced you’re going to be watching maybe entire government agencies or parts of them get challenged and maybe even dissolved V ramaswami has suggested that’s on the plate you’re going to be watching investigations into antitrust violations and involvement of many agencies and individuals with all of this and so it’s also very likely you’re going to be seeing a lot of the different pieces also facing their own legal battles against criminal investigations or losing their jobs or whatever else I I think we’re actually entering unknown territory right now I I don’t think we’ve seen anything like this before and so anything is possible we’ll see how it unfolds but that said I will be covering it so join me as we go forward folks thank you so much for being here join me tomorrow 10:30 a.m. eastern time as always and thank you so much for being here folks uh please share this episode don’t forget to don’t forget to hit the like button it helps us quite a bit and as always please take care of yourselves stay informed and stay free thank you [Music]
Experience Free Speech
Welcome to the Conversation on Free Speech!
Welcome to Truly Right View!
We’re here to explore real, unfiltered truths—unswayed by media bias or government agendas.
What do you think? Are you ready to hear insights you won’t find elsewhere?
👉 Subscribe to the Truly Right View YouTube Channel | Rumble Channel and join our community dedicated to open dialogue.
What Does Free Speech Mean to You?
In today’s world, where tech giants and news outlets hold so much influence, is free speech at risk?
From silencing certain viewpoints to heavy censorship, the freedom to speak without fear is under threat.
Tell us your thoughts:
- Is free speech still a right everyone enjoys?
- Do you think we’re protecting it well enough?
🔍 Let’s dive into the heart of this discussion. Add your voice below!
Will You Speak Up or Stay Silent?
In the end, the future of free speech rests in our hands. We can either stand idly by as it is eroded by corporate and governmental overreach, or we can take action to protect and preserve it.
Will you speak up for your rights, or will you allow them to be taken away piece by piece?
The choice is yours.
Subscribe to the YouTube channel and the Rumble channel for Truly Right View today, and support our patriots shop together, let’s ensure that free speech remains the bedrock of our Constitutional Republic.
