I’ve always considered Microsoft’s Linkedin a serious platform, have used it a lot over the years, find the debates there much more constructive and dialogue-oriented than on, say, Twitter or Facebook. I think most who operate on Linkedin would agree. (About Linkedin here).
There has always, as I see it, been a measure of tolerance – again compared with Twitter and Facebook – and I have never been the object of censorship.
Until now.
Here is what I found tonight on a post that I put on The Transnational and which was reproduced from the Pittsburg Post Gazette on November 30, 2022: Dan Kovalik: Eastern Ukraine had good reason to join Russia after Kyiv’s aggression. Daniel Kovalik teaches international human rights at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law and is the author of “The Plot to Scapegoat Russia.”
How hilarious! 6589 impressions! The intellectual fools – or some kind of unintelligent artificial intelligence, AI, or algorithm – on Linkedin censors a text reproduced from a mainstream US media.
Wow!
OK, I click on the link to – in red – learn more. Lots of words but not one that explains why Linkedin has removed the post. None of it goes against any of what it says or you think it says because it is words and words and more words and could, if they so want, be used against tons of posts and comments on Linkedin.
On that page, you’ll see this text:
“Violating our community policies can result in action against your account or content
These policies apply to all members. Depending on the severity of violation, we may limit the visibility of certain content, label it, or remove it entirely. Repeated or egregious offenses will result in account restriction. If you believe action taken on your content or your account was in error, you can submit an appeal.”
Appeal? There is no Appeal form there. But you may read on and perhaps use the link to Removed Content link – at which you can read:
“If your account has been restricted or content removed and you believe the action was in error, you can appeal your case and we’ll review your account. To begin the appeal process, you can log into your account and follow the onscreen messaging or reply to the message you received that provided notice of the content removal.”
! !
Wow for a second time. Linkedin does not even provide you with a page where – plain and simple – you can argue why you disagree with Linkedin’s decision to remove a post you have made.
That is so backward that it must be deliberate. On that point, Facebook is much better and simpler – but then, they do not respond to anything you submit…
Be this as it may, I wrote this to Linkedin:
“Concerning: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7009559378450104321/
1) You’ve deleted this post without consultation or reason.
2) Your explanation – “Learn more” – does not mention anything that would legitimate the deletion of this particular post – from a globally respected research and public education site that has existed since 1986 and which is operated totally independent of government and corporations – and know more about international politics than Linkedin.
3) Your link to “launch an appeal” does not work – there is no way I can make such an appeal on the link you provide which is words, words and more words – and no clear place to write an appeal. Thus I am writing here.
I have taken a screenshot of the post, which you state that only I can see now it HAS BEEN deleted and will disseminate it worldwide. (I happen to be among the 10% most active in the world on the Internet).
So I suggest you get your acts together and explain EXACTLY why you had the temerity to just take down that particular post.
Thanks!
Jan Oberg, janoberg@mac.com phone +46 738 525200 – welcome to contact me any way you want.
But ASAP.
/Jan Oberg
I shall update you here if and when I get an answer…
To quote Ian Davis from his book “Pseudopandemic”:
“To challenge scientific and medical evidence, to reinterpret statistical data or debate an opinion, you cannot simply censor it. Some form of dialectic is required. A take down of content is the antithesis of dialectical reasoning. It is inimical to our culture. It is the modern day version of book burning…”
Anyone challenging the agenda of the globalist elites is stamped a hateful far right extremist. In other words a terrorist. No arguments are needed. It’s enough you don’t fully comply with the diktats of the bio-security Technate. You are simply infected with wrong-think.
Wrong-think is anything going against the Western propaganda machine of what to think of “war on terror”, “Corona pseudo pandemic”, US war against Russia (sorry, I meant “Ukraine war”) etc. etc… Welcome to the totalitarian West.