The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Washington Watcher II Archive
Facebook “Whistleblower” Frances Haugen Just Wants More Censorship. Real Solution: Mandate Free Speech
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Washington D.C. and the Regime Media are ululating about Facebook “whistleblower “Frances Haugen, a former middle manager whose defection from the Big Tech behemoth set Democrat and Republican hearts aflutter. They all see her as a heroic champion who exposed her former employer’s misdeeds. But Conservatism Inc. and even some sensible patriots don’t really understand her message: she thinks Facebook allows too much free speech and the government must force it to censor more. That’s the opposite of what we need the government to do.

Haugen’s message isn’t exactly hard to understand. Indeed, she’s explicit about it. She wants more censorship because Facebook permits too much “Hate” speech, meaning speech she hates. She would have listeners believe the tech giant’s algorithms allow it to flourish [Facebook whistleblower revealed on ’60 Minutes,’ says the company prioritized profit over public good, by Clare Duffy, CNN, October 4, 2021].

Anyone with a brain knows that isn’t true. Facebook banned “white nationalism” back in 2019, then promptly suspended any account accused of the grave crime. It censored discussion of “The Great Replacement” and explicitly prohibits ads it claims denigrate immigrants and minorities [Zuckerberg: Facebook will prohibit hate speech in its ads, by Salvador Rodriguez, CNBC, June 26, 2020]. ( was banned, apparently as part of Facebook’s anti-Trump drive, in 2020). Then Facebook even banned POTUS 45, while he was in still office. Only those living in a fantasy world would believe Haugen.

But this is why Democrats represent and coach her: They’re simpatico on future censorship [Facebook Whistleblower Is Leftist Activist Repped By Lawyer For ‘Whistleblower’ Behind Trump Impeachment, by Luke Rosiak, Daily Wire, October 5, 2021].

Haugen’s demand: The government should revise Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 to make tech giants legally liable for “hateful” content. Users could sue Big Tech platforms if they see content that offends them.

Several patriot and populist figures and have called for lawmakers to revise Section 230 as well, but instead to make the tech giants defend free speech, not push them to censor more. Section 230 grants tech platforms immunity from publisher liabilities because they supposedly act as neutral forums. Of course the platforms are clearly violating the spirit of the Section 230, but Haugen’s proposals would make censorship the letter of the law [Activist, Leftist Facebook Whistleblower Demands Congress Regulate Social Media Platforms, by Emily Zanotti, Daily Wire, October 5, 2021].

Significantly, Big Tech doesn’t mind. It actually wants more government regulation and more rules defining how their myriad platforms must act. As long as they aren’t broken up, this situation works for them. They keep their power and receive full approval to censor as much as they please.

In other words, despite what you’re reading in the Regime Media, Haugen’s message doesn’t threaten the tech giants. It simply justifies another Democrat power grab [Democrats and Media Do Not Want to Weaken Facebook, Just Commandeer its Power to Censor, by Glenn Greenwald, Substack, October 5, 2021].

But even Respectable Right publications such as Daily Wire and Breitbart do see through Haugen and warn that her agenda is antithetical to conservative interests [Far Left Facebook Whistleblower Frances Haugen Working with Trump Impeachment Lawyers, by Allum Bokhari, Breitbart, October 5, 2021]. The Daily Wire, the creation of Ben Shapiro, should be especially concerned considering how much his operation needs Facebook and other Big Tech social media, and how much Leftist journalists nevertheless want his gravy train to end [How Ben Shapiro Is Using Facebook To Build An Empire, by Miles Parks, NPR, July 19, 2021].

But the usual suspects, Conservatism Inc., and some Republican lawmakers, were seemingly too distracted by Haugen’s attacks on Facebook to notice her true message. They even support her. Thus Rachel Bovard, a prominent Populist Inc. commentator, praised Haugen because Facebook “commodifies” children. She says she doesn’t care about Haugen’s political motivations:

Republican senators appeared to agree with most of what Haugen said. Only one senator, Ted Cruz, asked about her censorship bent. Haugen easily batted him away without any follow-up. Every other GOP senator at the hearing asked about how Facebook spreads harmful content—meaning marketing to children—and nodded in bovine agreement as Haugen warned about the “Hate Speech” machine. Even Leftist outlets noted how submissive Republicans were, never pushing her on the free-speech issue [The Facebook Whistleblower Finally Got Republicans to Stop Yapping About Anti-Conservative Bias, by Aaron Mak, Slate, October 5, 2021].

That’s not good. We need Republicans to focus on the central problem of Big Tech, which isn’t mean tweets or algorithms gone awry. It’s how the tech giants control political discourse and suppress viewpoints they don’t like.

Mainstream conservatives and patriots have embraced myriad attacks on tech giants because they hate its Leftist bias, but their solutions don’t address censorship.

One such idea: antitrust actions. Obviously, Big Tech must be cut down to size. It uses its power to crush free speech alternatives such as Gab. Antitrust actions would give competitors a better chance to succeed.

But the proviso is that free speech must be preserved. Many Republicans and patriots have forgotten that and happily ally with censorious Leftists who also want to break up the tech giants. However, that won’t help the cause. For instance, right now Leftists are using antitrust legislation and litigation to pressure Big Tech to censor more. Thus a lawsuit filed by New York’s attorney general Letitia James against Facebook was done in part to pressure the company to censor “misinformation” and other “objectionable content” [Democrats Using Antitrust to Demand More Big Tech Censorship, by Allum Bokhari, Breitbart, January 3, 2021].

Any ideas of what that content might be? Well, it won’t just be kiddie porn.

And there’s more. Congress unveiled five bills to initiate antitrust actions last summer. They earned support from a number of House Republicans who want to curb the tech industry’s power. But again, most would empower the Biden Regime and its Leftist bureaucrats to impose their will on the tech giants, and that will mean more censorship. The poster girl: Lina Khan, the London-born Pakistani chairman of the Federal Trade Commission who earned bipartisan support for her confirmation. Twenty-two Republicans, including much-touted tech critic Josh Hawley, voted for her. Rachel Bovard cheered Kahn in The Federalist, arguing her confirmation “put Big Tech on notice” [Lina Khan’s Confirmation As FTC Chair Puts Big Tech On Notice, June 17, 2021].

But like all Leftists, Khan wants to go after Big Tech for not censoring enough. She has written about the plague of “disinformation and inflammatory content” on social media. She helped aid an investigation by the House antitrust subcommittee that alleged social media were bad because they allowed conservative news stories to go viral on its platforms [Democrat Led Antitrust Bills Are a Massive Gamble, by Allum Bokhari, Breitbart, June 17, 2021]. Khan has worked closely with Sandeep Vaheesan, another South Asian legal scholar, who argues that the FTC must be used as a “progressive secret weapon” that tackles “structural racism.” Khan has the power to act on that crazy recommendation [FTC Chair Lina Khan’s Co-Author: Use Antitrust to Address ‘Structural Racism’, by Allum Bokhari, Breitbart, June 22, 2021].

And Kahn might be able to do that thanks to Haugen’s media blitz. She can expect a lot of good press if she pledges to use her powers to attack Facebook’s alleged tolerance of “hate speech.”

All this means one thing: Patriots can’t get sidetracked. Granted, reducing the size of these gargantua is a good thing. But our main job is protecting free speech. Joining forces with Leftists on antitrust measures harms us, not Big Tech.

Republicans must focus on revising Section 230 so it explicitly protects all political speech. Antitrust moves must wait until that is accomplished.

Gab CEO Andrew Torba has long cautioned Republicans against eliminating Section 230 [An Open Letter to President Trump on Section 230, Gab, October 16, 2020]. He argues removing Section 230 protections would all expose sites to litigation and make it harder for free speech sites like Gab to survive. This suggests the best solution: revise, don’t abolish, Section 230, to better protect free speech.

Sen. Hawley and Arizona Rep. Paul Gosa have already proposed separate bills that would give Section 230 more teeth to protect free speech. Tennessee Sen. Bill Hagerty has proposed a bill that would establish tech platforms as “common carriers,” which would open them to all and require them to protect free speech under their moderation policies [GOP senator proposes declaring Big Tech ‘common carriers’ to stop censorship, by Steven Nelson, New York Post, April 27, 2021].

All of these bills would protect free speech and give patriots and other dissidents a fighting chance in court against tech censorship.

They are far more worthy of patriot attention than Haugen’s hysteria.

(Republished from VDare by permission of author or representative)
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Censorship, Facebook, Political Correctness 
Hide 8 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Stogumber says:

    By the way, is there a term for outspoken anti-libertarians like Haugen? What are we to call them? “Suppressarians” (no, not a serious proposal) “Totalitarians” is much to broad and ill-defined.

  2. It’s so obvious. She acts like she’s acting against Zuck, and Zuck acts like he’s defending his company from her charges. BUT they both want the same thing. Zuck is a Jewish supremacist who wants to censor the entire internet to protect Jewish interests, and that’s what she calls for to the delight of Jews and their cuck dogs.
    Of course, if only Jews outright call for it, people might take notice. So, Jews use this shabbos goy shikse to play the role of ‘whistleblower’ when, if anything, she shakes her ass to the whistles of Jews. She’s a whistle-dancer.

    What is she really saying? She’s saying Zuck isn’t Zuckish or Jewish-supremacist enough. Facebook must do MORE to shut down free speech and speaking-truth-to-power.
    And how does Zuck defend himself? He says Facebook is trying to do all that, but if there’s pressure to do more, he will do even more, yessir. How circular can you get? And he says the entire internet should follow. The ‘whistleblower’ is demanding that the oligarchs act more oligarchic.

    Jews used Muslims to do 9/11. Jews are now using a white shabbos goy shikse to pull a 9/11 on free speech on the net. And all the politicians and media people hailing her are either Jews or cucks of Jews.

    What do Jews want for the future: JEWS OWN, GOYIM RENT.

    Renters can always be evicted. No wonder the likes of Ben Shapiro supports the Jewish Blackrock. Jews buy up all stuff, and goyim just rent. Jewish-controlled Democrats support it. And GOP supports it as ‘free enterprise’.

    If communism was about universal ownership(which didn’t work because people can really own things privately), 21st Jewish-capitalism is turning into universal renter-ship.

    In reality, the state owned everything under communism, and Jews(and their cuck goy partners) will try to grab everything under reset-capitalism. Stalin had forced-collectivization, and Jews have forced-commercialization. You own nothing. Jews command the clouds, and you get to use a piece.

  3. In other words, Frances is a chunky lesbian who worships the old farting hairy bulldyke Hillary Clinton….

  4. The SEC should look into Zuckerberg’s recent transactions to see if he sold Facebook short before this twit came along.

    This is so clearly staged. Zuck and Haugen probably conspired to produce this spectacle. They want the Fed Gov to come in and do their regulating for them. That lets them off the hook because they can claim they aren’t responsible for any censoring if the Fed Gov is involved.

    The democrats are behind this. Somewhere, there’s a plan that involves this as a small part. The overall plan is much bigger. Eventually, gov’t will control all the banks, all the media, etc, but do it in a sly way so that voters, the morons, won’t notice.

  5. Trinity says:

    haha. Like we didn’t see this one coming. It is all about the Jews.

    Cue: Po-jama People by Frank Zappa

  6. KenH says:

    I thought everything white people said can’t be be believed since it’s tainted by privilege, racism and white supremacy? So why did scumbag Senators roll over and bat their eyelashes for lily white, blond haired Franny Haugen given how warmly she was received by leftists in the media and in the Senate chamber? Franny is obviously a left wing political activist.

    Franny told 60 Minutes a sob story about how she lost a good friend to “conspiracies and misinformation” which is lefty speak for right of center political opinions they don’t like. She also claimed the lack of online political viewpoint censorship caused the January 6th erection (insurrection) at the Capitol.

    Under the pretext of protecting children from bad stuff online they want to force tech giants to remove political content that offends the sensibilities of the radical left and their constituents. Allowing lawsuits against against platforms who host “offending content” is designed to kill right of center political speech on the major tech platforms and put smaller platforms like GAB, Telegram, Rumble, Bitchute and Odysee out of business with (((frivolous lawsuits))).

    If “offensive content” becomes the basis to circumscribe the 1A with civil litigation then whites should start suing Jewish Hollywood, the major TV networks, CNN and MSNBC for the anti-white hatemongering and anti-white content they regularly produce.

  7. Notsofast says:

    she is a classic trojan whore. beware of geeks bearing gifts. that picture of zuckerberg looks like he’s about stick his tongue out a foot and snatch a fly off of her. maybe icke might be on to something.

    • Replies: @schnellandine
  8. @Notsofast

    Were I a professional physiognomist, instead of just freelance, that picture would have me ensconced in the laboratory, partly from fear, partly from inspiration for my new book.

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply -

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Washington Watcher II Comments via RSS
The Hidden Information in Our Government Archives
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
How America was neoconned into World War IV