The term “vulgarism” first came into use in the 16th century as the apex of satirical literature and has not lost its relevance since. In a broader sense, obscenity or vulgarism refers to politics
Source translation for Mixstuff – Evgeniya Yakovleva
The term “vulgarism” first came into use in the 16th century as the apex of satirical literature and has not lost its relevance since. In the broadest sense, obscenity or vulgarism refers to a policy of restricting the spread of knowledge, as well as a hostile attitude towards science and progress. And it seems that you and I are, unfortunately, on the verge of a new era of obscenity.
Social media censorship
Not long ago, Twitter announced the introduction of tools such as personal blocking. The new setting will help users choose who is allowed and who is not allowed to respond to their tweets. In other words, you can control the discussion as a whole, and the reader will only see the answers that fit your point of view. Facebook learned to add a note to certain posts that they may contain inaccurate information (even if it is not), and Instagram removes posts that may hurt someone’s feelings.
In addition, the entire group is denied access to all the information that site owners disagree with. In the USA, where most of these companies are based, there is a fully legal possibility of suppressing freedom of speech. The only solution is the organization of new sites that are independent of the political inclinations of the powers that be, for whom the total benefit is more important than the love for truth.
Harassment of lecturers in universities
Freedom of speech means the right to fight statements that you disagree with. But there is a difference between exercising your right to protest and exercising this right to protest against the complete blocking of the vote. It now seems to be the goal of the final protesters, and the cancellation of university lectures happens with regularity. An example would be the bullying of journalist Milo Yannopoulos or Professor Nicholas Christakis. Each such case demonstrates that less freedom was expressed than simply the ability to shut down an enemy with the cry of one’s opinion in an open dispute. In today’s logic, truth is no longer born.
Censorship on Youtube
The people behind the scenes of Google decided to save us from themselves by removing conspiracy theories and other material that they did not like. They deliver their verdict by protecting us from wrong information. T. s. Elliott’s statement comes that most of the evil in the world is committed by people with good intentions. And Google Inspiration can also be called a noble effort, if not for a “but”: conspiracy theories are sometimes far from the truth. For example, the incident in the Gulf of Tonkin, which led to the beginning of the Vietnam War, and for the first time only discussed the narrow scope of conspiracy theorists.
Search result distortion Google
In the last three decades, we transferred the wealth of human knowledge into the hands of a single corporation, but we only understand this. Over the past two years, Google has consistently eroded the quality of search results. Furthermore, if previously the results were only supplemented by sponsored sponsored links, now, it seems, only they come in the sample.
Online forums are full of website owners who claim that traffic to their sites has fallen by 50–70% in favor of results from big brands that agree with Google’s approach. It can be expected that in the future most search results will end in error 404 (page not found). Google effectively shut down the Internet.
In the Middle Ages, the practice of closing the Bible in vaults (not to prohibit reading, but because of their great value because books were written by hand) was prevalent. and you know what? This time is coming back. Against the backdrop of Google’s struggle against smaller sites and YouTube, more and more information disappears or gets paid.
Sooner or later, all conflicting content will be blocked, and the Internet will be exactly the opposite of what it should have been. Instead of free distribution of information, we get a tightly closed repository of knowledge, accessible only to those who can buy it. And, unlike the medieval Bibles, we would not have priests who could recite them to us every day. It is indeed a deliberate lack of access to the knowledge of all but the wealthy elite.