Mediaboss Marketing

To the Editor: Once censorship occurs, a platform can never be trusted again (Jack Dorseys Biggest Fight Yet, Cover Story, June 5).

Sure, today it may be a political position you agree with, but tomorrow this may change. Users and advertisers must now be looking over their shoulders asking whether this runs afoul of the censors. This becomes an added risk for all users.

Why do people feel the need to protect the public from political language they feel is incorrect or offensive? Is the filter to ban everything that may set off the violence-prone, the mentally ill, or gun owners? Then Catcher in the Rye would be banned by Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey and his censors.

I do not believe much of anything I see or hear on the news shows, cable, or the internet. Many of President Donald Trumps tweets are nonsensical. Twitters 280-character limit does not allow for explanation and understanding.

This is a platform designed for rants and slogans. If you believe in free speech and the ability of the public to think, you would best steer clear of Twitter.

Don Knife, Rocky River, Ohio

To the Editor:The table showing that Facebook and Twitter had annual revenue of $30 and $20 per user, respectively, was very enlightening. It seems to me that there are enough users of these platforms who are now persuaded that the ad-based model is a failed experiment, and would now be willing to pay $20 or $30 a year to subscribe to equivalent community platforms that are free of ads, clickbait, and disinformation.

Without the overhead of managing the ad environment, an ad-free subscription-funded platform should be able to make a tidy profit while providing useful, curated, fact-checked news.

Dennis Strauss, entura, Calif.

To the Editor:Your article really struck a chord in me (Can Big Business Fix Racial Injustice? It Has to Try. Heres How, June 5).

Im a 62-year-old Latina who was driven to succeed after graduating from Indiana University business school in the class of 1984. I knocked on countless doors, read dozens of job-success books, and dressed and acted the part; yet the best offers I got were for secretary/reception.

I updated and modernized a few office systems and kept being passed up for promotions. Even after proving my financial effectiveness for bosses, request for promotions resulted in recently hired, white temps getting the better jobs.

Decades later, I proved myself as a sought-out Montessori teacher by parents, students, faculty, and staff for effective, compassionate, knowledgeable, dedicated work.

Yet here I sit dreading having to work two unfulfilling jobs (downsizing from three) and unable to have any pleasure in life, as I only live and work to pay off bills.

Jobs and prospective positions (even as a bilingual, certified teacher applying to Title 1 schools with a majority of Latino students) have brushed me aside to make room for white, recent grads.

Thank you for your article, which reminded me that its not me; its the system.

Yolanda Casillas Ochoa, Sarasota, Fla.

To the Editor:Your article Amid U.S-China Tensions, Active Managers Are Buying (June 5) describes the various ways that investors could invest in Chinese stocks if they were to be delisted on U.S. markets. Sure, the growth potential in Chinese stocks seems high, but why would people take the increased risks in buying Chinese stocks?

When Fred Astaire and Cyd Charisse performed Dancing in the Dark, it was the epitome of grace and elegance. Dancing in the dark, however, is not a good strategy for financial investing. The Chinese government has forced Chinese companies to put a virtual blackout on meaningful financial disclosure. The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board has no visibility into Chinese company financial data.

Honestly, would you buy a new car if you went to the makers website and it had a bunch of pretty pictures but no information about the cars performance or safety features?

Arthur M. Shatz, Oakland Gardens, N.Y.

To the Editor:The article Merger Arbs Are Confident Despite Whispers on Tiffany Deal (June 4) states that Taubman Centers shares at [a then] $44 trade at a 15% discount to Simon Property Groups offer of $52.50 a share. While technically correct, that is not how professional merger arbs evaluate a deal; it would be more appropriate to state the percentage increase from the current price to the offer price, which at the prices stated in the article would amount to a 19.32% return.

Edward Taussig, Brooklyn, N.Y.

To the Editor:I think the general feeling was, this jobs report will stink but it didnt stink as badly as we thought it would (Why the Jobs Report Isnt Quite as Good as It Seems, Up & Down Wall Street, June 5). The job numbers wont resemble what we saw at the beginning of the year because businesses have opened at a diminished capacity, unemployment payments are like a raise for many, some companies wont survive, and most will probably tread cautiously until they know what the reopened economy looks like. Career politicians found it easy to close businesses, but few to none have ever opened a business (at least one that didnt fail). So their so-called guidance will probably mess things up for a while to come.

Terrence Milan, On Barrons.com

Send letters to: mail@barrons.com. To be considered for publication, correspondence must bear the writers name, address, and phone number. Letters are subject to editing.

Original post:
Letters to the Editor of Barrons - Barron's

MOSCOW Five senior editors at Vedomosti, one of Russias most prominent business newspapers, resigned on Monday in protest at the appointment of an editor-in-chief they say has applied pro-Kremlin censorship to its coverage.

Their resignation, reported by Vedomosti itself, occurred after the publications acting editor-in-chief, Andrei Shmarov, was confirmed to the post by the publishers board of directors.

The five editors Dmitry Simakov, Boris Safronov, Philip Sterkin, Kirill Kharatyan and Alexander Gubsky all served as Shmarovs deputies, Vedomosti reported.

We do not find it possible to work with an editor-in-chief who with his actions has shown that he doesnt care about rules, standards and principles, Safronov, the deputy editor-in-chief who has worked for the paper since 1999, told Reuters.

One reporter in April publicly complained that Shmarov had forbidden negative coverage of President Vladimir Putins plans to change the constitution so that he could potentially stay in power until 2036, and said that Shmarov had threatened to fire those who defied the ban.

Others said Shmarov had barred publication of opinion polls carried out by a research firm that had irritated the Kremlin.

Shmarov told Reuters at the time that he had not threatened to sack anyone and that his editorial decisions were his own and not the result of any instructions given by anyone else, including from any government or business structure.

Shmarov said on Monday he could not immediately comment.

Until recently, Vedomosti had been widely regarded as one of the few high profile publications in Russia not to be under the direct control of the authorities or businessmen with ties to the Kremlin.

Shmarov was appointed acting editor-in-chief at the end of March, after it was announced that two businessmen would be buying the newspaper. Journalists had called for the newspapers management to appoint someone else. (Additional reporting by Elena Fabrichnaya Editing by Mark Heinrich)

See the original post:
Editors quit Russian newspaper, accusing boss of pro-Kremlin censorship - National Post

Hugh Johnson Advisors CIO Hugh Johnson explains why hes buying Facebook, MasterCard and Alphabet.

Facebook on Friday apologized afteran Interceptreport saidthe company would allow business administrators to censor certain words from employees like "unionize" onits office management platform, Facebook Workplace.

The report cites aninternal company meeting in which Facebook employees discussed the Workplace app, which allows users to communicate with coworkers using a professional interface withrecognizable Facebook features like News Feed, Groups, Chat andRoom.

The company said during the meeting that there are "benefits" to"content control" for administrators, giving the example of the word "unionize" as one that business leaders might choose to censor on the platform, The Intercept reported.

The Facebook signup web page on a laptop and the Facebook app on a smartphone. (iStock)

"While these kinds of content moderation tools are useful for companies, this example should never have been used and we apologize for it," Facebook told FOX Business."The feature was only in early development and weve pulled any plans to roll it out while we think through next steps."

Walmart, the Singapore government, Discovery Communications, Starbucks, Campbell Soup Corporation and other large companies use Workplace, according to The Intercept.

FACEBOOK'S ZUCKERBERG FELT 'DISGUSTED' OVER TRUMP LOOTING POST: REPORT

Facebook has prided itself on promoting free speech on its platform and has even come under fire from employees and users alike who disagreed with the company's decision to not remove posts from President Trump in recent weeksthatTwitter decided to label or hide, highlighting the different ways social media companies choose to moderate content.

A number of Facebook employees staged a virtual walkout after it was revealed that the platform did not take the same action as Twitter against a Trump post saying, "When the looting starts, the shooting starts" in reference to potential law enforcement action against violent protesters in the wake of George Floyd's death. Twitter hid the post and added a disclaimer while Facebook kept it up without labels.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg testifies before a House Financial Services Committee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Oct. 23, 2019. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg defended leaving the posts up; he has repeatedly said Facebook promotes free speechand voters have the right to make their own decisions regarding political posts and advertisements.

GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE

We have a different policy than, I think, Twitter on this, Zuckerberg told Fox News anchor Dana Perino on May 27.I just believe strongly that Facebook shouldnt be the arbiter of truth of everything that people say online. In general, private companies probably shouldnt be especially these platform companies shouldnt be in the position of doing that.

Trump signed an executive order in May that would require the Federal Communications Commission to re-examine some aspects of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which gives protections to social media companies so they are not held liable for what users post on their platforms but still allows those platforms to edit posts that they feel could pose a threat to users.

GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE

View original post here:
Facebook apologizes after report it would censor 'unionize' on Workplace app - Fox Business

Leah McSweeney has approximately zero problems calling people out. The Real Housewives of New York City newbie is known for her trademark no-nonsense approach to life, so it should come as no surprise that she had a few choice words for a follower who felt the need to wait for it report her to Instagram.

Yes, you read that right.Athree-year-old post that Leah shared on Instagram in which she semi-exposed her nipple was reported to Instagram for going against community guidelines. And it's safe tosay Leah is not having it.

Let's back up, shall we?Leah posted a sexy snap on her feed way back when on September 19, 2017 (I know). In the shot, she is maxing and relaxing in a pair of bold pink sweatpants with no top to speak of to celebrate her Married to the Mob collaboration with none other than Penthouse Magazine. Apparently, the photo was so scandalous that it forced one follower toreport it for nudity.

"Imagine being this much of a loser to go back years on my ig and report my nipple???"she wrote on June 10 in her Instagram Stories.

Bravos Style & Living is your window to the fabulous lifestyles of Bravolebrities. Be the first to know about all the best fashion and beauty looks, the breathtaking homes Bravo stars live in, everything theyre eating and drinking, and so much more. Sign up to become a Bravo Insider and get exclusive extras.

Continue reading here:
Leah McSweeney Claps Back After Her Years-Old Nip Slip Was Reported to Instagram - Bravo

However, it is not just the present and the future that these anarchists propose to change. Like Pol Pot, with his Year Zero, or Mao Zedong and his Cultural Revolution, they wish to change the past.

In university history departments across the Western world in the last decade or so, there has been a determination to "decolonise the curriculum". This is an approach that politicises the subject by imposing a Marxist slant on it. Far from paying attention to the main facts of history, it concentrates on imposing the "woke" values of a noisy, self-advertising minority on a very different past.

Without attempting to understand the dynamics of the 19th century, these demonstrators want to remove evidence of imperialism and imperialists. In Britain, the Black Lives Matter leaders also direct their guns at capitalism, and it is a short step from there to a movement for anarchy.

Context is irrelevant to these people: historical figures who had attitudes or performed deeds of which today's society rightly disapprove are to be vilified and despised, with no quarter given. That is why statues and monuments are being ripped down or defaced around the world. For these people, the purpose of history is not to seek the truth, but to deploy it as a weapon however crude and distorted to manipulate the present.

It doesn't matter how you dress this act up: it is the imposition of the views of a minority of agitators on the rest of society without any attempt at consultation or respect for democracy. Then again, the whole point of being an anarchist is to reject democracy and to seize any excuse to attack manifestations of the establishment whether they are statues, other monuments or police officers.

Just look at some of the statues that have been attacked. Winston Churchill, who fought against fascism at a moment when Britain could have gone under the Nazi jackboot, had "racist" daubed on his statue in London's Parliament Square.

The statue of Winston Churchill in Parliament Square, London.Credit:AP

In Ballarat, busts of John Howard and Tony Abbott were vandalised with red paint, which suggests that monuments to anyone who failed to advocate leftist politics is now fair game.

In light of that, it is perhaps inevitable that Sydney's Captain Cook statue should become a target. Australia has certainly had distasteful episodes in its treatment of our Indigenous people, especially in the 19th century. But our nation, admirable by almost every international standard, only exists because of James Cook.

Colonisation of Australia's land mass was inevitable, and as Howard has all too often argued, British settlement was a far better outcome than other possibilities. Think of the English language, rule of law, representative democracy, a free press and a market economy. Context is everything.

Loading

Defacing the statue of Cook will make no difference whatsoever to the plight of Aboriginal Australians. How would eliminating Cook from our history reduce the rates of family violence, youth suicide, drug and alcohol abuse, welfare dependence and incarceration in Indigenous communities?

History cannot be undone; its legacies are in every society, everywhere. Censoring the past by removing statues, or stopping the showing of Gone with the Wind or even an episode of Fawlty Towers only makes a proper comprehension of history (and what the past was really like) impossible to grasp.

To us, much of history was horrible, but it is why Western society is as it is. Removing evidence of that history is the construction of an alternative reality. It is not reality itself.

Tom Switzer is executive director and Jacinta Nampijinpa Price is director of the Indigenous program at the Centre for Independent Studies.

More:
Censoring history makes the past impossible to grasp - Sydney Morning Herald