WHEN ONLY ONE SIDE IS ALLOWED TO BE HEARD

Big trouble ahead? How do I know? Well, ‘They’ are controlling you. ‘They’ are silencing you by Everett Piper does not provide the first such report.

Here Piper explains what happens what he wrote a column that was unexpectedly popular.

As I say, my column was essentially not the stuff that heretofore the past 20 months would have been considered the most inspiring.


The result?

Despite what I considered pallid content, my article immediately jumped to “trending” status on several news sources such as The Hill, Facebook, Apple News and the like. In fact, it was number three (I think) when I first saw it on one of my news feeds.

But then something peculiar happened. The article just inexplicably disappeared from all the trending lists. It didn’t gradually lose traction. It was just gone. It was featured one second, but then it literally just disappeared. A mere mist. Dust in the wind. Popular and trending one minute and nonexistent the next.

I was confused, so I contacted The Washington Times to let them know all the above. Their response? “You’ve been shadow-banned. Every article we’ve published on natural immunity has received the same.”

‘They’ are controlling you. ‘They’ are silencing you

Read all of Piper’s column. Then consider point of controlling the information we receive? Is it not to control us and the decisions we make?

Do our friends or our enemies try to manipulate us that way? Do we want our enemies making our decisions for us?

This entry was posted in Citizen Responsibilities and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

35 Responses to WHEN ONLY ONE SIDE IS ALLOWED TO BE HEARD

  1. Doug says:

    There is so much context missing from what you are saying here. Who is the “they”? If some plug was pulled, who pulled it? I mean.. it certainly feeds the conspiracy peoples’ imaginations for some secretive star chamber, deep state elitists sitting around and calling the shots to suppress all we think and do, yet there is a reality from which the action was initiated. I would be curious what it was. I can certainly guess, without jumping to all the “personal affront to my personal liberties” emotionalism. Likely very similar to the reason Roosevelt censured domestic publication of dead Marines bobbing in the waters surrounding Tarawa.
    Second… his first article was pulled.. but yet.. his current article you linked apparently has the same elements in it.. all the stuff about natural immunity… and somehow that got published. If anything the censorship seems inconsistent.

    • Mel Wild says:

      Shadow-banning is not conspiracy theory. It’s real. To “shadow-ban” doesn’t mean they (Big Tech) pull it from their platforms. What happens is that it no longer shows up in the “trending” posts on Facebook, Twitter, etc., nor will it show up in the “recommended” algorithms of Big Tech. The only way people will see it is if they subscribe or follow the author. This constitutes a de facto suppression of free speech.

    • Tom Salmon says:

      @Doug

      Who is they? You could try reading, my last post. You may wish to read Senator Josh Hawley’s book. You might want check with former President Trump. Or you could research the censorship that many Conservative publications have complained about. You could visit https://www.newsbusters.org/freespeech. You could check with Parler. But I suppose you don’t FEEL the necessity of doing any of that. After all, you have CNN.

      • Doug says:

        Hawley???
        Any of that you cited a government entity? Or are you implying government is telling private social platforms what to do?

        • Tom Salmon says:

          @Doug

          Back to the other side of your mouth, I see. There are two things to consider:
          1. Administration officials have been caught working with, even admitted to working with, Facebook actively telling them who to censor.
          2. The Big Tech companies are protected from lawsuits. Supposedly, they are not publishers; they host publishers. Therefore, they are not responsible for content. Yet, they are arbitrarily censoring people just because they disagree. That effectively makes them publishers.

  2. Mel Wild says:

    Big Tech and the Mainstream Media have been faithfully following Herbert Marcuse’s “Repressive Tolerance” playbook. He was a Neo-Marxist professor who came to the US from the Frankfurt School (birthplace of Critical Theories) and had a profound effect on activists in the 1960s. When we understand this, the one-sided news narrative makes total sense. Only allow one side of the conversation and repress the other. As Marcuse said in his 1965 essay, “Critique of Pure Tolerance”:
    “Liberating tolerance, then, would mean intolerance against movements from the Right and toleration of movements from the Left.”

  3. Tom,
    If we discern the Supreme Court decision to not allow religion to be taught in public schools, or legislators refusal to allow school choice or school vouchers to parents, there is another culprit other than Big Tech in this issue, in my opinion.
    Regards and goodwill blogging.

  4. boudicaus says:

    Reblogged this on boudica.us and commented:
    H/T Citizen Tom

  5. pitybull1 says:

    if you want a good argument about say, Ford pickups are better than Chevy pickups, then you drink your beers and argue all night and have fun at it. . . . but to argue about things that have absolutely no connection point . . . ultimately leads to violence. . . .

    I know that the woke will never understand the awakened. It gets proven every day in every way. Communism tells the same story in many ways, but they all begin the same way. . . . we, my friends, are on the way to open conflict soon. Hard to believe? the only reason we are not yet there is because of the slowness of the awakened to rise up and put an end to the stupidity . ..

  6. pitybull1 says:

    that’s exactly why I say what I do, there is no social connection and because of it, the AMERICAN dream is becoming a nightmare. Woke attempting to force itself upon the awakened is guaranteed to cause an end result of violence. There is no opening for discussion with a cult filled to the brim with Marxism’s ‘useful idiots’

  7. Tom Salmon says:

    When people think government gives us our rights instead of God, they don’t see much wrong with denying those who disagree with them any rights.

  8. Tom Salmon says:

    @pitybull1

    There are people who positively worship government, busybodies who think we should do everything they tell us to do.

    The USA was set up as a federation to keep government as local as possible. When government leaders live in our communities, it is easier to hold them accountable.

    It is already almost impossible to hold the Federal Government accountable. God help us if we empower the UN to run our lives.

    Our own leaders use the COVID19 pandemic to shut down a huge number of small businesses. It is easier for tyrants to control large bureaucratic businesses. So, the last thing we want to give fabulously wealthy people is an excuse to use COVID19 to do anything.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s