On July 28 Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO), a major critic of the big tech industry, introduced legislation that would penalize large tech companies that sell or show targeted advertisements by threatening a legal immunity enjoyed by the industry, the latest onslaught on Big Tech’s business practices. The bill, titled “Behavioral Advertising Decisions Are Downgrading Services (Bad Ads) Act,” aims to crack down on invasive data gathering by large technology companies such as Facebook and Google that target users based on their behavioral insights. It does so by threatening Section 230, part of the Communications Decency Act, that shields online businesses from lawsuits over content posted by users. The legal shield has recently come under scrutiny from both Democrat and Republican lawmakers concerned about online content moderation decisions by technology companies. On July 28, Senator Brian Schatz (D-HI)and Senate Majority Whip John Thune (R-SD) will hold a hearing to examine the role of Section 230. The senators recently introduced legislation to reform the federal law.
In May, President Donald Trump signed an executive order that seeks new regulatory oversight of tech firms’ content moderation decisions, and he backed legislation to scrap or weaken Section 230 in an attempt to regulate social media platforms. “Big Tech’s manipulative advertising regime comes with a massive hidden price tag for consumers while providing almost no return to anyone but themselves,” said Hawley, an outspoken critic of tech companies and a prominent Trump ally. “From privacy violations to harming children to suppression of speech, the ramifications are very real.” His recent legislation to ban federal employees from using Chinese social media app TikTok on their government-issued phones was passed unanimously by the US Senate Committee on Homeland Security and will be taken up by the US Senate for a vote.
Facebook is considering imposing a ban on political ads on its social network in the days leading up to the US Presidental election in November, according to people familiar with the company’s thinking. The potential ban is still only being discussed and has yet been finalized, said the people, who asked not to be named talking about internal policies. A halt on ads could defend against misleading election-related content spreading as people prepare to vote. Still, there are concerns that an ad blackout may hurt “get out the vote” campaigns, or limit a candidate’s ability to respond widely to breaking news or new information. Such an action would amount to a major change for Facebook, which has so far stuck to a policy of not fact-checking ads from politicians or their campaigns. That has prompted criticism from lawmakers and advocates, who say the policy means ads on the platform can be used to spread lies and misinformation. Civil rights groups also argue the company does not do enough to remove efforts to limit voter participation, and a recent audit found Facebook failed to enforce its own voter-suppression policies when it comes to posts from President Donald Trump.
Ad blackouts before elections are common in other parts of the world, including the UK, where Facebook’s global head of policy, Nick Clegg, was once deputy prime minister. Facebook is an important platform for politicians, especially at a time when many people are stuck at home and campaign rallies pose potential health risks due to the coronavirus. In 2016, President Donald Trump used Facebook ads and the company’s targeting capabilities to reach millions of voters with tailored messaging, a strategy that some believe helped win him the election. Alex Stamos, Facebook’s former top security executive, said that any political ad ban could benefit Trump. “Eliminating online political ads only benefits those with money, incumbency or the ability to get media coverage,” he tweeted. “Who does that sound like?”
Political advertising has been a complicated issue for online platforms, and many of them have taken different approaches. Twitter has banned most political ads, but still sells some “cause-based” ads that touch on economic, environmental, or social issues. Google’s YouTube has already sold ad space on its homepage to the Trump campaign for the days leading up to November’s election, a deal that ensures Trump will be highly visible on the video service when people start to vote. In 2016, Russian operatives used Facebook to spread misleading and divisive ads and posts. The company has made a series of changes since then to tighten up its political ad process, including the implementation of stricter requirements for buying marketing spots and the addition of a searchable ad archive.
President Donald Trump on May 27 threatened to regulate or shut down social media companies for stifling conservative voices, a day after Twitter attached a warning to some of his tweets prompting readers to fact check the president’s claims. Without offering evidence, President Trump accused such platforms of bias, tweeting: “Republicans feel that Social Media Platforms totally silence conservatives voices. We will strongly regulate, or close them down before we can ever allow this to happen.” Trump, a heavy user of Twitter with more than 80 million followers, added: “Clean up your act, NOW!!!! Trump’s threat to shut down platforms such as Twitter and Facebook was his strongest yet within a broader conservative backlash against Big Tech.
Republicans feel that Social Media Platforms totally silence conservatives voices. We will strongly regulate, or close them down, before we can ever allow this to happen. We saw what they attempted to do, and failed, in 2016. We can’t let a more sophisticated version of that….
Twitter for the first time attached fact-check labels on President Donald Trump’s tweets after he made unsubstantiated claims on May 26 about mail-in voting. In a pair of early morning posts on May 27, the Republican president again blasted mail-in ballots. President Trump falsely claims that mail-in ballots lead to vote fraud and ineligible voters getting ballots. Twitter and Facebook declined to comment on Trump’s tweets. Asked during Twitter’s annual meeting why the company decided to affix the label to Trump’s mail-in ballot tweets, General Counsel Sean Edgett said decisions about handling misinformation are made as a group. “We have a group and committee of folks who take a look at these things and make decisions on what’s getting a lot of visibility and traction…,” he said. In recent years Twitter has tightened its policies amid criticism that its hands-off approach allowed fake accounts and misinformation to thrive. Tech companies have been accused of anti-competitive practices and violating user privacy. Apple, Google, Facebook, and Amazon face antitrust probes by federal and state authorities and a US congressional panel. The Internet Association, which includes Twitter and Facebook among its members, said online platforms do not have a political bias and they offer “more people a chance to be heard than at any point in history.”
Republican and Democratic lawmakers, along with the Justice Department, have been considering changes to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a federal law largely exempting online platforms from legal liability for the material their user’s post. Such changes could expose tech companies to more lawsuits. Republican Senator Josh Hawley, a frequent critic of Big Tech companies and strong supporter of President Donald Trump, sent a letter to Twitter Chief Executive Jack Dorsey asking why the company should continue to receive legal immunity after “choosing to editorialize on President Trump’s tweets.”
This video by CaspianReport discusses “Saudi Vision 2030,” a plan proposed by the government of Saudi Arabia that seeks to reduce the countries dependence on oil, diversify its growing economy, and develop public service industries such as health, education, infrastructure, recreation, and tourism. The goals of the plan include reinforcing economic and investment activities, increasing non-oil industry trade between countries through consumer goods, and increasing government spending on the military. The details of the plan were first announced on April 25, 2016, by Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman (MbS), and the Council of Ministers has tasked the Council of Economic and Development Affairs with identifying and monitoring the mechanisms and measures crucial for the implementation of “Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030.”
The main rationale behind the Saudi Vision 2020 plan is to decrease the dependence that the Saudi economy has on oil revenues. The oil industry comprises close to 50% of Suadi Arabia’s total GDP, and the Saudi government has sought to decrease its reliance on oil revenues since the 1970s with an overall poor track record of success. The core priority of the Saudi government is to be able to develop more alternative sources of revenue for the government such as taxes, fees and income from the sovereign wealth fund. Another significant proposal is to lower the dependency of the citizens of the country on public spendings such as spending on subsidies and higher salaries and to increase the portion of the economy contributed by the private sector to provide more employment opportunities and to provide growth in the GDP.
Suadi Vision 2020 has three main pillars: the status of the country as the “heart of the Arab and Islamic worlds,” the determination to become a global investment powerhouse, and to transform the country’s location into a hub connecting three of the most influential areas of the world (Western Asia, Europe, and Africa). The plan is supervised by a group of people employed under the National Center for Performance Measurement, the Delivery Unit, and the Project Management Office of the Council of Economic and Development Affairs. The National Transformation Program was designed and launched in 2016 across 24 government bodies to enhance the economic and development center
Saudi Vision 2030 is built around four major themes which set out specific objectives that are to be achieved by 2030. The four themes are:
A vibrant society: urbanism, culture and entertainment, sports, Umrah, UNESCO heritage sites, life expectancy.
A thriving economy: Employment, women in the workforce, international competitiveness, Public Investment Fund, Foreign direct investment, the private sector, non-oil exports
An ambitious nation: Non-oil revenues, government effectiveness, and e-government, household savings and income, non-profits and volunteering.
Projects: About 80 major projects are to be developed in Saudi Arabia by the year 2030. Most of these projects are financed by the Public Investment Fund of Saudi Arabia.
One such project that is part of the Saudi Vision 2030 is the National Transformation Program. First approved on June 7, 2016, the National Transformation Programa sets out the goals and targets to be achieved by the Kingdom by 2020. It is the first out of three phases each lasting for five years. Each step will accomplish a certain number of goals and targets that will eventually help the Kingdom in reaching the ultimate goals of Vision 2030. To assist the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to finance all the projects to be developed and facilitate the process of achieving the goals and targets of Vision 2030, Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman announced in early 2016 that an IPO of Saudi ARAMCO is going to take place. However, only 5% of the company will be offered on the stock market. Other projects put forward under the Saudi Vision 2030 plan are the construction of a luxury resort located on the Red Sea between the cities of Umluj and Al-Wajh, the expansion of the Saudi entertainment industry, and the expansion of women’s rights. In the realm of women’s rights, the Saudi Vision 2030 plan seeks to grant women the right to vote, own property, travel abroad freely, and attend higher education facilities.
Overall, the international reaction to the Saudi Vision 2030 plan has been somewhat mixed. Many critics argue that the lack of formal political institutions, inefficient bureaucracy and a significant gap between the labor force required by the Saudi labor market and current educational system serve as a hindrance on many of the growth prospects that the country has proposed. Other critics argue that the Saudi Vision 2030 plan does not take into account the fact that rapid reform efforts may not be entirely accepted by the Saudi population, and that a slow and gradual reform plan would be a more viable policy to implement. Despite some criticism towards the reform proposals, many international observers feel that it represents a genuine opportunity for the Saudi government to reform and create a far more positive view on the country in the eyes of the international community.
This video by PressTV presents a review of President Donald Trump’s first full year in office. One year has passed since Donald Trump has been elected US President. Since then, the world has seen a US President unlike any other. One that is aggressive, impulsive, uninterested in politics, and egotistical. Despite coming into office with a grand series of promises to change American politics for the better, the case can be made that the policies pursued by the Trump Administration have changed American politics for the worst. Trump has thus far failed to realize any of his campaign promises, fanned the conspiracy flames regarding his relationship with Russia, contradicted and insulted his staff, and made enemies of allies throughout the world. Additionally, President Trump has attacked the governmental institutions he oversees, threatened to use his powers to ruin the lives of his political opponents, waged war against members of his own party, and engaged in race-baiting, sexism, ableism, and religious bigotry when pursuing his destructive agenda.
One such area in which President Donald Trump left his mark during his first year was his immigration executive order banning (mostly Shi’a Muslim) immigrants, travelers, and refugees from seven majority-Muslim countries (Syria, Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Sudan, Somalia, and Libya). This action ignited a firestorm of protest and revealed the bigoted, white supremacist agenda underlying the Trump Administration’s policies. President Trump also rattled the nuclear-saber more than any other President in US history with his incitement of North Korea, going as far to threaten the North Korean government with “fire and fury.” Many politicians on both sides of the aisle worry that Trump has misused the moral authority surrounding the office of the Presidency through such statements and actions.
President Donald Trump claimed during his first year in office that he has the unilateral authority to order the Justice Department to open or close investigations into his political opponents. Such rhetoric threatens to set a negative precedent in future Administrations that goes directly against the principles of separation of power spelled out in the US Constitution. President Trump’s outreach to autocratic regimes such as Saudi Arabia and Israel further characterized his first year in office. By backing the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman, President Trump has given the green light for Saudi Arabia to escalate its three-year-long intervention in Yemen, which has resulted in the deaths of thousands of innocent people and has encouraged hatred towards Shi’a Muslims throughout the world. Additionally, President Trump’s choice to recognize Jerusalem (“al-Quds” in Arabic) as the capital of Israel has encouraged the Israeli regime to expand its crusade against the Palestinian people.
President Donald Trump also left a negative mark within the realm of international politics and has adopted a firm, neoconservative view regarding the role of the US in the world. President Trump has repeatedly denounced the Iranian nuclear deal, calling it the “worst deal ever negotiated” despite the fact that it was upheld by numerous organizations, most notably the United Nations and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Additionally, President Trump has proposed a hardliner stance towards Iran, calling it a “terrorist nation” and calling for US military action to remove the current Iranian government from power. These actions on the part of the President have led to many European leaders such as German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Emmanuel Macron to rethink their reliance on US political and diplomatic leadership on the world stage.
In terms of domestic policy, President Donald Trump generally has had an abysmal first year in office. Trump failed to follow through on repealing The Patient Protection Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”) despite the fact that his party controls both houses of Congress, and has relied on Executive Orders more often than any other first-year President in US history. The only true legislative achievements of President Trump’s first year in office are his nomination of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court and the passage of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017. Many critics argue that the presence of Neil Gorsuch on the Supreme Court will move the Judicial branch far to the right and have a profound (and what many view as a negative) impact on decisions such as drug policy, women’s rights, abortion, gay rights, and electoral reform. Additionally, nearly all economic organizations point out that the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is a clear giveaway to the wealthiest 1% and only serve to further the widening income gap between the wealthy and the poor.
Have you ever tried to organize a college event? Did you get frustrated by issues of planning and attendance?
College is a stressful environment often characterized by heavy workloads and important deadlines to meet. Planning a successful college event can be most successful by following certain guidelines to maximize your potential. Finals/Midterms times and prior to are the worst time to hold events. Here are some tips to help you set up a successful event:
1. Early Bird gets the worm
First-time Political leaning or educational events, in my opinion, are always best to be done in the first 2-3 weeks of school. Before Midterms and before homework starts getting overwhelming.
2.Time Time Time
Make sure the event isn’t at a time when most people are in class but perhaps “college hour,” or a time when people want to have some pizza after class.
3. Who’s Who?
Figure out who are the Demographic most likely to attend. Figure out how to attract them, like LGBTQ attract them by telling them about the issue and how it’s important in their life. How they should come and will benefit. Then figure out how to attract large segments of the student or other population.
4. Monopoly MOFO
Making sure your event has a monopoly over the time/date is important so other events don’t drain from your audience. If a more “liberal” socially- (not economically that word is misused today), then figure out what other events that draw people in that realm may be happening or run by and inform them of your event beforehand to make sure you have a leg up on them. Something as simple as saying “hey come to my event” and “save the date.” Informing the faculty who are “experts” in that field your event is on can help spread the word as well.
5. Art Bitches
Make sure you have an attractive flyer to catch someone’s eye to the event. This should also include online postings like on Instagram/Facebook which are drawing more attention these days. A picture is worth a thousand words so keep it relative to the event.
6. Munchies!
Having Pizza at the event can go a long way where people who aren’t generally as interested now come to the event and want a piece of that action. So food is a way to lure people just make sure you try to gauge the attendance with food supply otherwise it will take away from an event. Refillable cups is advised along with water to reduce plastic use and make your event more environmentally friendly.
7. Songs of the time (EXTRA)
Having a musician play relevant music at the end of the event can lure more people- his or her friends to attend- and ends an element that there will be a musician playing at the end. Try to keep the music almost relevant to the event. For example, if the event discusses healthcare policy, include a song that talks about health care or if the event is about immigration feature a song about immigration. Try to keep the music it a genre you think people will like. Solidarity Singers in NJ are known for political songs and is a good source for political events.
Early in Semester
During a right day of week/Time
Figuring out the target group
Making sure the target group has only your event to attend
Posters that are well designed
Some food at the event
(Extra)Perhaps music performance at the end or start
(These are lessons I have learned from my failed events-XOXO )
here is the propaganda video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJIHCczsbJo
Neo-Con propaganda; The US lied about Nuclear weapons and the invasion was a war crime. The US government killed a million people in Iraq and leave it out of the video? Fucking monsters. The US destroyed Iraq multiple times and armed in multiple times. Who sold Saddam the chemical weapon he used to gas the Kurds? How about the fact that there was no Al Qaeda presents in Iraq before the US invaded in 2003? Left that out too. How about the fact that it was all doubted by the entire world that there anything but oil in Iraq? How about the fact the troops that left Iraq went to Afghanistan which was falling apart? The war crimes he mentioned, the US destroyed the city of Fallujah in Iraq, where the New general Mattis “Mad Dog” covered it up. How about the giant waste and fraud committed by American contractors? Left that out too? “It was President George W. Bush who signed the Status of Forces agreement in 2008, which planned for all American troops to be out of Iraq by the end of 2011.”The US occupation of Iraq was illegally, immoral, a war crime and most Iraqi’s saw them as occupiers. Iran is not the mortal enemy of the US, the US overthrow a Democracy and they are still angry about it- it lead to many deaths. Iran is the enemy because the US is allied with Saudi Arabia Wahhabi’s instead of Iran Shiite’s. How can you say they secured Iraq after destroying its military and creating the power vacuum in the first place?
This video by CaspianReport discusses the decline of the Ottoman Empire during the late 19th and early 20th Century. The Ottoman Empire was an empire founded in 1299 AD in Anatolia (present-day Turkey) by Osman I, a Turkish tribal leader. By 1354, the Ottoman Empire reached into Southeastern Europe and eventually ended the Byzantine Empire (Eastern Roman Empire) in 1453 with the conquest of Constantinople. During its height of power in the 16th and 17th centuries, the Ottoman Empire was a multinational and multicultural empire controlling a majority of the Middle East and Southern Europe (including countries such as Greece and parts of present-day Italy), the Caucuses, and Northern Africa. With Constantinople as its capital and control of lands around the Mediterranean basin, the Ottoman Empire was at the center of interactions between the Middle East and Western worlds for half a millennium.
Despite its long track record of success, the Ottoman Empire began to fall behind European rivals such as Great Britain, France, and Russia during the mid-18th century. Additionally, the Ottoman army consequently suffered severe military defeats in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, which prompted them to initiate a process of reform in the late 1830s known as the Tanzimat. As such, over the course of the nineteenth century, the Ottoman state became more powerful and organized, despite suffering territorial losses, especially in the Balkans, where many new states such as Greece and Albania emerged by the 1860s. The Ottoman Empire allied with Germany in the early 20th century, hoping to escape from the isolation which had contributed to its recent territorial losses, and thus joined World War I on the side of the Central Powers. While the Empire was able to hold its own during the conflict, it began to deal with internal dissent, in particular with the Arab Revolt in its Arabian holdings and the rise of Jewish immigration into the region of Palestine starting in the late 19th century. During this time, atrocities were committed by the Ottoman government against the Armenians, Assyrians, and Greeks. The Ottoman Empire ultimately collapsed by the end of World War I and was replaced by the Republic Turkey in 1923. The former Ottoman territories were also divided up into new nations by Great Britain and France after World War 1 and continue to serve as the basis for the modern Middle East.
This video by Caspian Report discusses the Islamic conquest of Persia (Present-day Iran) during the 7th Century AD. The rise of Islam as a religion coincided with significant political, social, economic and military weakness in Iran, which was then under the rule of the Sassanid Empire. The Arab armies initially attacked Iran in 633 through the province of Asōristān (present-day Iraq). After a 21-year-long campaign, the Sassanid Empire collapsed in 654 to the Arab forces under the leadership of Uthman ibn Affan.
The conversion of the Iranian people to Islam was gradual and incentivized in various ways over 400 years with some Iranians never converting and widespread cases of the destruction of cultural artifacts and opponents to Muslim rule being harshly persecuted. Even though the Arab forces attempted to force an entirely different culture and traditions on the Iranian people, Iranian culture and the Persian language remained largely intact.
Additionally, the Arab conquest of Iran is mentioned to have ultimately strengthened Islam and allowed it to become a major world religion that has endured. On the other hand, the Arab conquest is one of many examples of a foreign imperialist invasion force attempting to invade Iran and weaken its culture. Additionally, the Arab conquest of Iran is mentioned to have prevented the emergence of a strong and independent Iran until the rise of the Safavid Empire in the early 16th Century.
This video by Capsian Report discusses the current political crisis in Venezuela. Venezuela is now experiencing a protracted political crisis that threatens to tear apart the country as a result of a general downturn in its economy. As a result of the crisis, the government of Venezuela under the leadership of President Nicholas Maduro has decreased political freedom and has thus far failed to turn the economic and political situation in the country around. The political crisis in Venezuela was only gotten worse in recent weeks and culminated with an attack on the Supreme Court building by several dissident groups on June 28, 2017. Even though this video ignores the role that the US government has played in promoting protests against President Maduro and in destabilizing the economy of Venezuela, it gives a great insight and explanation of some of the problems facing Venezuela over the past five years.
