they can sensor anything they want. that s often coming from the democratic party, the majority in the party nor washington that tells these compcompanies compcomp censor this or that. if you don t, rel use our power to punish to p you for your failure to evade. that s illegal. i think it is pretty clear supreme court lois rulings on this. how is it continuing? absolutely needs to be test cases. there had been decades of supreme court president where city officials would tell book bookstores, if you don t remove these books, you will have all kinds of investigations. when the state, the pressure or private actors and sensors for the government in ways the government could not do directly, that, too, is as free
one of the things that cynical people say is who cares. people in other countries can do what they want. these regimes do care about the words and images that go around the world about them. the one measure of how much china cares is that any tv is going to have this section deleted. they sensor anything that can come into the country that defers to tiananmen to the massacre there and what they have done to the internet underscores that and we have seen in other countries in taiwan and south correa become overturned. at some point that happened to those courageous students of nan 89. that s a story i look forward to
political behavior. what kind of effect could this sort of distortion have on an election? you know i m not a conservative. i do. i love america. i love democracy. i think we should all be rising above the politics here. and recognize the extreme danger that we are facing when a company like google can basically sensor anything it wants to sen censure anything they want to censure. this is a leak that confirms what we have been saying and writing for years. it confirms number one that individual employees at google have the power to manually remove material remauve the content we see.
to us and said, oh, we re sorry. we re taking our report down. really? we re sorry? so it s working. it s early. and facebook has said they want to be careful. they want to test this and see if they could make it work better. it s early days. but nobody here wants to sensor anything. we just want to give people accurate, credible information. you said the lie of the year was fake news. and your essay this week identifying the lie of the year. and yet the federalist said one of the problems is you. she said politifact is a joke. we ve been getting these complaints from the conservat e conservativ conservatives, parts of the conservative media for many years now. so i m not entirely surprised by this. i think there is the mentality
about the proliferation of fake stories on networks. abc is a partner and so is plit fact. there has been a lot of blow back already. why is it a worthwhile idea? why are you helping facebook pry to fact check these fake stories. go to facebook, and they are going about their day looking to connect with friends and family and they see these headlines super dramatic and they are wondering if they re right or not. sometimes they are entirely made up. it is not trying to sensor anything. it is trying to parse out these reports. is there an example of a story you have helped to correct? so far so good. one of the reports that we did and published, the website that put out the fake news got back