Readers would be well aware of a change in attitude toward dissident viewpoints, at management level within Google and Facebook.

Where previously these companies exercised a degree of tolerance toward most points of view, the commercial realities of allowing anti-capitalist, anti-globalist or even just plain stupid material to take hold on their platforms have been brought into sharp focus over the past few months.

From around the first week of April, reports began to appear in the mainstream press concerning a backlash of sorts by advertisers on the Google-owned YouTube platform; the issues raised included concerns over “inappropriate” videos being preceded by corporate advertising and a lack of control on the part of sponsors over where their ads were appearing.

Companies such as Toyota, McDonald’s, Pepsi, Starbucks and many other globalist brands pulled their advertising from YouTube due the fact that their videos were being attached to, among other things, clips espousing Holocaust denial and anti-Semitism; this resulted in a hit in the order of 4% to the share price of Google’s parent company, Alphabet Inc.

cfd

The remedial action taken by Google, in this case, is not yet clear, they have spoken about re-writing the algorithms in their operating software to better tailor the targeting of advertising and made some comments about allowing advertisers greater freedom to tailor the placement of their ads on YouTube, as well as the millions of other, third-party sites overseen by Google.

It remains to be seen whether the measures taken by YouTube will make a difference to the user experience, or lure back lucrative advertising contracts; we may never really know the outcome but there has long been a policy in place where they do not allow posters of controversial material to monetise their channels as YouTube partners.

William_Gibson_by_FredArmitage
William Gibson predicted the corporate takeover of cyberspace

Facebook, it would seem, has decided to act quickly in heading off any potential advertiser walk-out by permanently banning a swathe of controversial, nationalistic or civic patriot themed accounts and the personal pages of anyone associated with banned material, notable among them our own UNA Facebook account.

Where previously these companies exercised a degree of tolerance toward most points of view, the commercial realities of allowing anti-capitalist, anti-globalist or even just plain stupid material to take hold on their platforms have been brought into sharp focus over the past few months.

Now, much has been made of this purge by self-styled, online anti-racists and their mirror images in what we call the “right wing Antifa”, those conservatives who zealously pursue and harass nationalists and true patriots.

These serial pests, shut-ins, and obsessive compulsives are crowing loud and long about their tactics of mass reporting of any dissident thought having brought down pages such as UNA, UPF and Reclaim Australia, to name a few.

Looking at the situation logically, while having a basic grasp of how Facebook actually works and its record on such matters since the inception of the platform, we can only come to one conclusion: this cull of dissenting points of view, this purge of ideas which contradict the globalist capitalist line must have been done in the name of the almighty dollar.

Rupert Murdoch, Michael Bloomberg
Fifteen years ago we were worried about the old media barons taking over the internet

After all, the White trash of Antifa and their ideological brothers and sisters in the civic patriot groups have been mass reporting genuine dissident material 24 hours a day, 365 days a year since the days of Myspace and message boards. Their numbers have actually greatly decreased over that time so the decision to kill off unpopular ideas on Facebook is clearly a commercial decision, not the result of a tactical breakthrough by a few, numerically irrelevant Trolls.

What is also clear to the logical observer is that cyberspace, to all intents and purposes, is no longer a neutral space, that corporations rule the internet, that what is commonly called “political correctness” is now an integral part of globalist lifestyle branding and that the only social engineering being attempted is within the consumer “culture” of the multinational corporation.

Looking at the situation logically, while having a basic grasp of how Facebook actually works and its record on such matters since the inception of the platform, we can only come to one conclusion: this cull of dissenting points of view, this purge of ideas which contradict the globalist capitalist line must have been done in the name of the almighty dollar.

The fashion in which the Facebook software tailors the user experience with targeted advertising, friend and page recommendations based on the browsing history of the individual user makes it unlikely that a person is ever going to see any content which may offend them, unless they go looking for it on purpose or something slips through on the feed of a friend.

sjw-freakshow-lauren-southern
No, uppity Social Justice Warriors had nothing to do with the great social media purges of 2017

This analysis also proves the fears regarding net neutrality, long held by futurists the world over; granted in the early years of the noughties it seemed as if Newscorp and traditional media might take over the web and turn it into something like Foxtel, however, the reality is that middle-of-the-road neo-liberalism now reigns supreme online.

The move to rid Facebook of commercially problematic content may be a way of appeasing the direct demands of its corporate partners, or it may simply be an expression of good faith by a company long criticised for hosting “extremist” points of view, we cannot say for sure.

It all makes sense to anyone in business, the inclusion of all individuals into the global consumer class and the accommodation of all their whims, tastes and fancies is obviously the best way to make money and the best use of the internet as a sales tool.

Globalist corporations support same-sex marriage, for example, because marketing these days largely revolves around concepts of lifestyle and a mix-and-match set of personal values drawn from the prescribed life choices of the cosmopolitan consumer culture; the more variations this culture can accept the more product the corporations can shift.

The move to rid Facebook of commercially problematic content may be a way of appeasing the direct demands of its corporate partners, or it may simply be an expression of good faith by a company long criticised for hosting “extremist” points of view, we cannot say for sure.

It is impossible to monetise ideas such as nationalism, patriotism, traditionalism and even Communism because they all rely on making us versus them distinctions and prescribe in-group loyalty above all else. If the consumer culture can be described as a smorgasbord, where the individual chooses his own identity from a range of possible components then its opposite must be a set menu, where a strictly limited number of options are available and the group assigns an identity for all.

enhanced-buzz-1504-1379943854-7
Liberals used to think this way

This is the heart of the matter and the real implication of the great social media purges of 2017, we must take the globalist-capitalists at their word.

They accuse Nationalists and true patriots of fostering division and unrest; a breakdown in social cohesion is their greatest fear but it is not the nation, the physical communities of towns and suburbs or the family they seek to protect, it is their global consumer monoculture, the deracinated, classless society held together by money and the material things it can buy.

We at UNA are, fortunately, on the record as being long term skeptics of social media, we use it when convenient but scarcely miss it when it is no longer available due to the fact that radicalisation of the proletariat and marginalised people via Facebook never seemed feasible to us.

What is more the people we seek to turn on to our brand of radical Australianism are not to be found on Facebook, where it is well known that something in the order of 80% of traffic is generated by around 10% of users; they are in the outer suburbs of our cities and the rural hinterland and outreach to those Whites with ears to hear has always been our primary concern.

alfred-e-neuman.jpeg

Advertisements

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s