Fact-checking the UN: Is the Internet dangerous for women? | FACTUAL FEMINIST

In another section, the report speaks of “recent
research on
how violent video games are turning children,
mostly boy, into killing zombies.” The footnote leads
to a rambling screed by a disciple of the
infamous Lyndon LaRouch. Not only is the report riddled with mistakes—its
proposals are totalitarian. It urges governments to use their powers to license only those
internet providers and search engines that “supervise” user content. This is precisely
what China does to censor its people online; except instead of subverting the communist
party, the crime would now be mocking a woman. xx In the US, freedom of expression is guaranteed
by the First Amendment. The Supreme Court routinely blocks government officials from
censoring even highly offensive speech. The internet can be rough—and threats of violence
or stalking and can be terrifying—but these are crimes and they are legally actionable
wherever they occur. Beyond that, a more civil and mannerly internet should be a matter of
private norms—and many internet sites are promoting that. Government supervision of
conversation is the last thing that any of us, male or female, need.
The UN cyberviolence report is a train-wreck. Yet the New York Times, Time, Wired and countless
other news sites reported on it without criticism. Not a word about all the mistakes and outlandish
proposals. To her credit, a tech writer at the Washington Post did alert readers to its
dangerous implications for free expression. It was left to a bloggers like Jaime Bravo
and a columnist at British Breitbart – Milo Yannapoulis. Jaime Bravo went through every
one of the 120 footnotes and found mistakes in 77 of them.  In some cases, the links
were broken or the source had nothing to do with the claim. Some of the footnotes were
left blank—in one instance the citation lead to a file in the author’s hard drive.
Yannapoulis exposed the appalling authoritarianism of the report’s proposals. Milo Yiannopoulos
had to do the fact checking… Yiannopoulos asked a good question, “Why is it left to
me, a sarcastic gay satirist and shitposter,” to fact check the UN? After Bravo and Yiannopolous brought these
egregious faults to light, journalists at New York Magazine and Mother Jones, began
to report the real story.   Is it out of the question for journalists
at the New York Times or TIME to review a report before writing about it and raise questions
about obvious anomalies? If it’s politically correct advocacy research on women’s victimization—the
answer is an emphatic yes. Well let me know in the comments section what
do you think of the UN report? Do you favor more government policing and regulation of
Twitter or Youtube? And if you found this video useful, please show your support by
subscribing to the series. Likes on Facebook are much appreciated. And please, follow me
on Twitter. Final message to the UN cyberviolence researchers:
Check your facts and your privilege.