Tag Archives: Devlin Barrett

Aug 11 2023

X-Corp CEO Linda Yaccarino: “If it is lawful but it’s awful, it’s extraordinarily difficult for you to see it, and you get labeled”…


Posted originally on the CTH on August 10, 2023 | Sundance 

X-Corp, formerly known as Twitter, CEO Linda Yaccarino appeared on CNBC to discuss the new direction of the platform and affirm her complete autonomy to control the decision making within the corporation.

It’s important to note the timing for the first CEO appearance of Yaccarino against the backdrop of CTH financial analysis of the company.  According to my calculations X-Corp will run out of working capital, the actual cash needed to pay expenses, in mid to late October; roughly two months from now.  At that point Elon Musk and Linda Yaccarino will need to go back into the market for more cash.

After asserting her complete unilateral control over all decision making within the company, Yaccarino then went on to discuss how information will be defined according to new operational standards she is helping to implement.  The pertinent part of the conversation happens at the 01:16 point of the video segment below. WATCH: 

.

…”if you are going to post something that is illegal or against the law, you’re gone. Zero tolerance. But more importantly, if you are going to post something that is lawful, but it’s awful, you get labeled.  You get labeled, you get deamplified, which means it cannot be shared, and it is certainly demonetized. … So, they [advertisers] are protected from the risk of being next to that content.”… 

The position essentially seems reasonable, I guess. However, I still don’t trust any of the cattle car valets with DHS authorizations and credentials.

.

.

Aug 10 2023

Elon Musk Partners with Global Disinformation Index, the Progressive Disinformation Specialists, to Diminish Advertiser Fears


Posted originally on the CTH on August 9, 2023 | Sundance 

The Global Disinformation Index (GDI) is the group who define the content on platforms according to their ideological worldview and then blacklist sites who do not align their content to support the GDI perspective.   According to the Washington Examiner, Elon Musk has just partnered with them in order to enhance the advertising portfolio of Twitter and find ways to make it lose less money.

CTH has previously said to watch the economics of the Musk situation, because that will determine the outcome of the decisions. The hiring of NBC-Universal executive Linda Yaccarino was explicitly to lure the advertising side of the issue back onto the platform.

Once you are reliant on the advertising, you must then comply with the content terms of the companies who control the advertising.   Joining with a group to define “disinformation” is an outcome.

WASHINGTON – Elon Musk’s X, the social media company formerly known as Twitter, signed an exclusive partnership with a “misinformation” tracker linked to a government-funded group blacklisting conservative media outlets, records show.

On the heels of Musk in July describing how the social media company had negative cash flows due to a 50% drop in advertising revenue, X is teaming up with Integral Ad Science, an ad-verification company, for a “brand safety” initiative. That same ad group, which uses an artificial intelligence algorithm to rate alleged “misinformation,” is affiliated with the Global Disinformation Index, a British group with two affiliated U.S. nonprofit groups that the Washington Examiner revealed is covertly feeding blacklists of conservative websites to advertisers to defund disfavored speech.

“I am completely against GDI in any form,” Rep. Ken Buck (R-CO), who sits on the House Judiciary and Foreign Affairs committees and has launched investigations into the British group over its alleged censorship efforts, told the Washington Examiner. “This new partnership with a group connected with GDI would only amplify the coercive and destructive powers targeting free speech.”

The partnership between X and IAS appears to undercut Musk’s touted commitment to free speech. The X owner has notably released “Twitter Files” documents to journalists, including Matt Taibbi, from Jack Dorsey’s time running the platform that show the company’s apparent coordination with the government to thwart right-leaning voices online. (read more)

I don’t want to say I told you so, but….

…”There is no such thing as “disinformation” or “misinformation”.  There is only information you accept and information you do not accept.  You were not born with a requirement to believe everything you are told; rather, you were born with a brain that allows you to process the information you receive and make independent decisions.”… 

Keep in mind, long before people realized the Dept of Homeland Security (FBI, DHS, CISA etc.) had a portal into Twitter, I was explaining how transparently obvious it was. {Go Deep – Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop} In part, the transparency of the problem is driven by CTH understanding of the costs associated with Twitter as a very unique platform in the sphere of social media. {Go Deep – Understand the Costs}

With the latest revelations we shared about the financial position of Twitter {Go Deep on FINANCIALS}, all of the moves now underway make sense.  Musk was on track to hit a date in/around October of this year where Twitter would be insolvent. If you had read those previous “Go Deep” links, you will easily see the problem.

In 2021, Twitter generated $5.1 billion in revenue, according to the Wall Street Journal.  According to the New York Times, in 2023 that revenue has dropped to around $1 billion per year.

Musk stated during public conversation that Twitter was essentially break even at $4 billion, which was the position in 2022 just prior to his taking over.  [2022 costs around $4.5 billion and revenue around $4 billion +/-, per public financial statements and reporting].   Musk cut approximately $500 million in expenses from realignment and staffing reductions.

Musk has a $1.5 billion debt service on the loan he took out, per his own admission: that’s more than $100 million per month.  The debt service alone is higher than his revenue.  As I noted last month, Twitter is losing somewhere around $300 million per month.  With $1 billion liquid in the bank, as of June (per Musk), that only gets him to September; by October, he needs another influx of cash, or else.

There is no business model, even with paying subscribers, for Twitter to exist without a major increase in revenue (Yaccarino) or a major decrease in costs.  As the business grows (more users), the costs increase (more simultaneous users), and the costs to subscribers would grow.  Twitter Blue subscriptions are around 180,000 users, paying $11/mo.  That’s around $2 million a month- a pittance in comparison to what he needs.

On March 2, 2023, the people in control of the Joe Biden administration officially announced that government control of internet content was now officially a part of the national security apparatus. [White House Link] If you have followed the history of how the Fourth Branch of Government has been created, you will immediately recognize the intent of this new framework.

The “National Cybersecurity Strategy” aligns with, supports, and works in concert with a total U.S. surveillance system, where definitions of information are then applied to “cybersecurity” and communication vectors.  This policy is both a surveillance system and an information filtration prism where the government will decide what is information, disinformation, misinformation and malinformation, then act upon it.

In part, this appears to be a response to the revelations around government influence of social media, the Twitter Files.  Now we see the formalization of the intent. The government will be the arbiter of truth and cyber security, not the communication platforms or private companies.  This announcement puts the government in control.

All of the control systems previously assembled under the guise of the Dept of Homeland Security now become part of the online, digital national security apparatus. I simply cannot emphasis enough how dangerous this is, and the unspoken motive behind it; however, to the latter, you are part of a small select group who are capable of understanding what was in this announcement without me spelling it out.

…”There is no such thing as “disinformation” or “misinformation”.  There is only information you accept and information you do not accept.  You were not born with a requirement to believe everything you are told; rather, you were born with a brain that allows you to process the information you receive and make independent decisions.”… ~ SUNDANCE

Jul 31 2023

Propaganda – Scrubbing the Internet of the Truth


Armstrong Economics Blog/Press Re-Posted Jul 31, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

Any article about Ukrainian War Crimes against Russians is being removed from the internet. Once again, we are witnessing propaganda on a grand scale. In any war, there are always war crimes on both sides. The fact that the West is scrubbing the internet and threatening anyone who dares to print the truth is really getting out of hand.

Russia-Ukraine war: Ex-French soldier accuses Kyiv of …

Republic Worldhttps://www.republicworld.com › russia-ukraine-crisis

May 14, 2022 — A volunteer and a former French soldier, Adrien Boke, said Ukraine’s forces are conducting “crimes” that are completely different from the …

https://web.archive.org/web/20220514070320/https://www.republicworld.com/world-news/russia-ukraine-crisis/russia-ukraine-war-ex-french-soldier-accuses-kyiv-of-war-crimes-i-was-shocked-dot-articleshow.html

Jun 1 2023

Project Veritas Sues James O’Keefe Because He Left After They Fired Him – Demand Injunction to Stop O’Keefe From Working


Posted originally on the CTH on May 31, 2023 | Sundance 

Apparently, when the Project Veritas board of directors fired founder and CEO James O’Keefe, they didn’t expect the result to be a collapse in their operational business model.  As the kids would say, Veritas f**ked around and found out.

Stunningly, Project Veritas is now suing James O’Keefe, the man they fired, for having the audacity to launch O’Keefe Media Group (OMG), and they are demanding a court order to stop O’Keefe from earning a living. [FULL pdf HERE]

According to the lawsuit, O’Keefe will not stop doing the expose’ journalism and activism that O’Keefe is known for.  Project Veritas is not happy, because many of the donors and supporters have left PV to follow James O’Keefe at OMG.

Veritas demands an injunction against O’Keefe, which may stop people -workers and donors- from leaving PV to join him. The lawsuit is a little extreme in the way it is written as an effort to convince a civil jury to find in their favor. [READ HERE]

Project Veritas sounds like they are an organization full of professional Republicans.

May 23 2023

WWII Who Bombed Cities First?


Armstrong Economics Blog/War Re-Posted May 22, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: Hi Marty,
May I ask your indulgence? Am trying to come to terms with my own ignorance of real history and figured that if someone as smart as you made the same error as I, wouldn’t feel as bad (good company and all that).
The German Blitz, the bombing of London, is a classic historical reference to the evil Hitler and the stoic peaceful Brits. Some claim that Churchill ordered the bombing of German cities first, and Hitler retaliated.
So here goes (no peeking):
Which of Great Britain or Germany was the first to bomb the cities/civilians of the other country during WWII?
Now, you may infer the answer b/c of the setup, but did you know that? I sure didn’t. Feeling a bit gaslit.
How about you?
All the best,
Greg

ANSWER: Yes. History is written by the victor – not the loser. It is not politically correct, to tell the truth. The only way to confirm the truth is to resort to contemporary reports before history is assembled. As I have explained, governments will engage in physiological warfare and this goes back to ancient times.

Augustus’ confrontation with Mark Antony was sold to the people that Antony was under some spell of the evil Cleopatra. He was actually telling the truth, for Cleopatra funded Mark Antony and pushed for civil war so that Egypt would thus conquer Rome. When Augustus (Octavian) defeated Antony at the Battle of Actium and invaded Egypt, he issued a coin announcing his victory. Look closely. It simply displays a crocodile on the reverse announcing Egypt is captured – not that he defeated a fellow Roman. Emperor Claudius was born to Drusus, brother of Emperor Tiberius, and Antonia Minor, the daughter of Mark Antony.

Perhaps the most daming confirmation of Cleopatra’s plot was that she struck Roman denarii with her and Antony’s portrait. These were certainly not struck in Rome or by any official Roman mint. They were part of her campaign to conquer Rome just as the West has always been seeking to conquer Russia which had the largest gold reserves of any nation up until the Communist Revolution of 1917.

We must always look closely at war for indeed the first casualty is always the truth. There was a gentlemen’s agreement that all sides would only bomb military targets and not cities at the start of WWII. Yes, Hitler also agreed. Modern history portrays Hitler as just evil in every respect. There were rules to warfare that everyone adhered to at the beginning of the war.

The first air raid on the German capital city of Berlin was actually carried out at night by an antiquated French bomber which had been a cargo plane converted for bombing. As it approached Berlin at midnight on June 7th, 1940, the city was fully illuminated thanks to the gentlemen’s agreement. The pilot, Henri Yonnet, pretended to act as though they were landing at Berlin’s Tempelhof Airport. As they neared the field, they overflew and headed at a very low altitude to the real target – the Siemens factory. It was a daring maneuver for the plane was vulnerable and could even be impacted by the blast at such a low altitude.

On August 17th, 1940, the German Luftwaffe dropped bombs on a factory in Southwestern London which was unfortunately in a residential neighborhood. On August 25th, 1940, the British RAF launched its first raid on Berlin in retaliation for the German bombing of London apparently using the excuse that some residential properties were hit. The gentlemen’s agreement was null-and-void. Hitler responded by unleashing the Blitz, (September 7th, 1940–May 11th, 1941), with a relentless intense bombing campaign of London. For eight months the Luftwaffe dropped bombs on London and other strategic cities across Britain. The attacks were authorized by Germany’s chancellor, Adolf Hitler after the British carried out a nighttime air raid on Berlin. The offensive came to be called the Blitz after the German word blitzkrieg (“lightning war”).

Apr 11 2023

Tucker Carlson Discusses Bud Light Rebranding Effort


Posted originally on the CTH on April 11, 2023 | Sundance 

Outlining much of what was previously discussed here, Tucker Carlson ponders the effectiveness of rebranding the #1 bestselling domestic beer to a 4% target audience that eliminates 96% of its customer base.  The facial expressions at 01:32 are priceless and funny – WATCH:

.

Mar 30 2023

Zuckerberg Could Not Buy TikTok So He Wants to Ban It


Armstrong Economics Blog/Censorship Re-Posted Mar 29, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

China banned Facebook in 2009, instantaneously eliminating 700 million users from the platform. Mark Zuckerberg was unwilling to give up a piece of his social media empire without a fight. Zuckerberg actually learned to speak Mandarin and toured mainland China, delivering speeches in their native tongue and attempting to align himself with the Chinese.

There was a popular app called Musical.ly with content reminiscent of the original version of TikTok, and Zuckerberg wanted to incorporate that platform into his empire. After 14 months of tough negotiations, ByteDance outbid Zuckerberg for Musical.ly to the tune of $800 million, and that app later merged with the TikTok we have in the US today.

https://www.tiktok.com/embed/v2/7213123097396792618?lang=en-US&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.armstrongeconomics.com%2Finternational-news%2Fpolitics%2Fzuckerberg-could-not-buy-tiktok-so-he-wants-to-ban-it%2F

“Until recently, the internet in almost every country outside China has been defined by American platforms with strong free expression values. There’s no guarantee these values will win out,” Zuckerberg said in a speech at Georgetown University. “While our services, like WhatsApp, are used by protesters and activists everywhere due to strong encryption and privacy protections, on TikTok, the Chinese app growing quickly around the world, mentions of these protests are censored, even in the US.”

Ironically, the feeling is mutual as China has always feared the US collecting its personal data. Zuckerberg mentioned his apps offer “strong free expression values,” but we have seen that lie explode numerous times over. He worked with the FBI to hide damning evidence against Joe Biden before his presidential campaign, de-platformed a sitting president, and wiped out hundreds if not thousands of users from the platform during the pandemic for spreading “fake news.” Zuckerberg used “fact-checkers” to ensure his version of the truth was promoted while silencing everything else. He appeased the NWO by promoting COVID-19 regulations and “the science.”

Facebook attempted to release a service similar to TikTok called Reels but failed miserably. Once he realized he could not reach China, Zuckerberg turned his attention toward banning his competitor entirely. Zuckerberg’s lobbying efforts temporarily paid off when Donald Trump signed an executive order to ban TikTok in 2020, primarily to show he was tough on China. TikTok then had an opportunity to be acquired by a US entity to avoid a ban, and Zuckerberg hoped his company would win. Around this time, US lawmakers were considering breaking up the Zuckerberg social media empire for having too much influence. This was when the propaganda against TikTok went into overdrive. He met with countless US senators and politicians to personally push his agenda.

Facebook was caught running a smear campaign against Google. In 2018, Facebook hired PR firm Definers to dig up dirt on its critics, including George Soros. They pinned that debacle on one employee and forced him to resign. Turning its sights to TikTok, the company hired a Republican consulting firm called Targeted Victory to “orchestrate a nationwide campaign” against TikTok. They hired unethical journalists to print op-eds bashing TikTok.

Meta was the largest internet lobbyist last year after spending over $20 million to sway US lawmakers. Zuckerberg hopes that his competition can be eliminated to remain the king of social media. However, the public is not rushing back to Instagram, Meta, or Facebook. In fact, people have begun deleting their accounts on those platforms to show that they will not return in the event of a TikTok ban.

Why do people love TikTok? Free speech. Political ads are banned on the platform but people may speak freely about any topic of their choosing, so long as it does not break obvious laws. As I mentioned a few weeks ago, something sinister is usually at play when both political parties unanimously agree.  Zuckerberg is more than willing to hand over all the data he collects to the US government on a silver platter. The US wants to monopolize your data and control the content you view. They cannot break into the TikTok database as easily and that is the main driving factor behind the proposed ban.

Nov 5 2022

Blue Check Twitter is Big Mad


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 4, 2022 | Sundance

As anticipated, Blue Check Twitter is big mad today….

(Politico) – Elon Musk began firing hundreds of Twitter employees on Friday, four days before the midterm elections, including members of the teams that work on U.S. elections and content moderation on the high-profile social-media platform.

Tweets flooded the platform on Friday, many using the hashtags #LoveWhereYouWork and #OneTeam, as employees let others know that they had been let go. Many of those posting had previously worked in roles including public policy, trust and safety, communications, engineering, marketing and human resources.

Half of Twitter’s public policy team was cut, including members of a team handling verification of politicians’ accounts, according to a person close to the company who requested anonymity. That work will now be folded into a team rolling out a subscription service that is expected to launch on Nov. 7.

[…]  Friday’s layoffs, however, appear to be adding fuel to the anxieties of both users and advertisers that Twitter is gutting its ability to keep tabs on who and what shows up on its platform. And the across-the-board cuts come just as the company’s moderation systems are expected to be tested during the midterms.

In a press call, a coalition of civil rights and activists groups called #StopToxicTwitter called for a global pause on advertising in the light of the mass layoffs on Friday. […] “With today’s mass layoffs, it’s clear that Musk’s actions betray his words,” Jessica González, co-CEO of the media advocacy group Free Press, said on the call. (read more)

Jun 9 2022

Twitter Reverses Position, Will Allow Elon Musk Access to Background Data


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on June 8, 2022 | Sundance

I think most people agree, the request from Elon Musk to see the background data from Twitter, used to evaluate bots and fake accounts, was entirely reasonable.

Twitter’s prior position that they would not permit Musk’s team to see the data stream was in ordinary violation of the terms of purchase.  It would seem to be commonsense that Musk has every right to inspect the data and evaluate Twitter’s prior assertions.

WASHINGTON POST – After a weeks-long impasse, Twitter’s board plans to comply with Elon Musk’s demands for internal data by offering access to its full “firehose,” the massive stream of data comprising more than 500 million tweets posted each day, according to a person familiar with the company’s thinking, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe the state of negotiations.

The move aims to end a standoff with the billionaire, who has threatened to pull out of his $44 billion deal to buy Twitter unless the company provides access to data he says is necessary to evaluate the number of fake users on the platform.

The firehose could be provided as soon as this week, the person said. Currently some two dozen companies pay for access to the trove, which comprises not only a real-time record of tweets but the devices they tweet from, as well as information about the accounts that tweet.

[…] Twitter’s leaders are skeptical of Musk’s ability to use the fire hose to find previously undetected information: The data stream has been available for years to some two dozen companies, which pay Twitter for the ability to analyze it to find patterns and insights in the daily conversation. They, along with some analysts and Silicon Valley insiders, say that Musk is using the data requests as a pretext to wiggle out of the deal or to negotiate a lower price. (read more)