There are a few different versions of this story being shared, so take your pick if you’re not a fan of The Guardian. Essentially, the story is this:
- floating around the pro-trump tar pits of the internet is a false video of Pelosi ripping up trump’s State of the Union speech print-out, which was doctored to “make it appear that she ripped the speech even as Trump saluted a Tuskegee airman in the audience,” instead of when she actually ripped up the print-out, which was when the entire speech concluded.
- It’s a suble difference, but the intent is clear: to make it look like Pelosi was insulting the honorable career of military personell, instead of making a statement about the corrupt garbage spewed by a Russian-planted useful idiot despot.
- Even after a specific request from Pelosi herself that Facebook and Twitter remove the doctored video from circulation, they deigned to allow it to stay, announcing that it “doesn’t violate their Terms of Service.”
- This isn’t the first time that social media has decided to side with corrupt political disinformation campaigns. A similar incident happened in May of 2019, when Facebook ” says it will continue to host a video of Nancy Pelosi that has been edited to give the impression that the Democratic House speaker is drunk or unwell” (ARTICLE: “Facebook refuses to delete fake Pelosi video spread by Trump supporters“)
- And of course, there was Facebook’s recent announcement about their decision to “not take down political advertising that contains false information” (ARTICLE: “Defiant Mark Zuckerberg defends Facebook policy to allow false ads“)
- Clearly, social media has a preference for supporting dictatorships over supporting truth and keeping political ads honest. Curious what motivation they have behind that…
The reason I especially wanted to share this article on our #freethenipple-focused website is to highlight the amazing disparity between social media’s acquiescence to actively harmful disinformation with real impact on the legislation that affects our daily lives, and their absurdly draconian censorship against genitalia in general, and female nipples in particular. How is it that corrupt propaganda is fine, but a nonsexual woman’s nipples, even in the midst of breastfeeding which most social media website purport (falsely) that they allow?
To review, here are but a few screenshots of the many, many times I’ve had posts banned across various social media sites, always for the heinous unforgiveable sin of female nipples:
(see a lot more of these posts on the ever-expanding “Every Time Topless Topics Has Been Banned” page of this site)