I know it is cliché to point out that someone “said the quiet part out loud,” but in former Vice President Al Gore’s case, it is simply too accurate. Gore, who claims we’re all going to burn to a crisp by a massive fireball if we don’t buy into his climate change agenda, recently made some telling comments about online algorithms and their impact on society.
While speaking at the United Nations Climate Conference in Dubai, where those who schoolmarm the rest of us about carbon footprints gather to show off their brilliance, Gore suggested that social media algorithms be banned because they promote echo chambers.
In making these comments, Gore simply illuminated precisely what the elitists wish to happen all over the world. My colleague Mike Miller wrote:
Speaking at the United Nations Climate Conference in Dubai (where else?), Gore went off his rocker:
If you have social media that is dominated by algorithms that pull people down these rabbit holes that are a bit like pitcher plants. These algorithms; they are the digital equivalent of AR-15s, they ought to be banned — they really ought to be banned!
It’s an abuse of the public forum. But when these — when people are pulled down these rabbit holes — you know what’s at the bottom of the rabbit hole? That's where, where the echo chamber is.
Gore added: “And if you spend too much time in the echo chamber, what’s weaponized is another form of AI — not artificial intelligence, artificial insanity.”
During his diatribe, Gore also referenced the Qanon movement and argued that the algorithms are somehow detrimental to self-governance.
So, let’s cut the crap already, shall we?
Yes, Gore’s assertion that social media has pushed Americans further into their chosen echo chambers where they are not as exposed to differing views as might be desirable. But this is not why authoritarians like Gore want to ban algorithms.
This is about giving more control to the elites by expanding the government’s ability to dictate what we can and cannot say. The objective is not to eliminate echo chambers, but to gradually build an echo chamber in which only the state’s messaging is highlighted--while giving us the illusion of choice.
Folks who have been paying attention to the trajectory of American politics can see that there is an effort to limit speech, especially dissenting voices. Need an example? You might recall when the Twitter Files and various reports exposed the reality that the government has been paying private organizations to collaborate with Big Tech platforms to suppress certain viewpoints on a variety of issues, one of which was the COVID-19 pandemic.
The State Department was found to have funneled oodles of cash to organizations like the Global Disinformation Index (GDI), whose aim is to target right-leaning news sites through their advertising dollars by placing them on blacklists. The idea was to persuade companies not to advertise on these sites as a way of attacking their revenue – especially if they posted content that countered the government-approved narrative surrounding the pandemic and vaccines. RedState's Brandon Morse wrote:
More information has come out concerning the GDI scandal thanks to a Washington Examiner report that details how this government-backed GDI blacklist was targeting websites that promoted or spoke openly about the Wuhan lab leak theory.
According to the Examiner, GDI published several reports on COVID-19 disinformation. For instance, in February of 2020, GDI published a report titled “Coronavirus: The makings of a disinformation pandemic?” Within it, GDI accused people openly discussing the lab leak theory of generating “adversarial narratives” as part of a “disinformation tactic.” This included slamming Arkansas Republican Sen. Tom Cotton for discussing the theory on Fox News.
In March of that same year, GDI released another report titled “Why is Ad Tech Funding These Ads on Coronavirus Conspiracy Sites?” The report targeted the conservative blog American Thinker and its article “The Wuhan Virus Escaped From a Chinese Lab,” on which an ad service was displaying an ad for an N-95 mask.
The GDI is just one of many that have pushed social media companies to crack down on non-approved narratives about the coronavirus. Perhaps if they could have done something about the algorithms back then, they could have ensured that only those who fear-mongered and lied about the virus would be heard. Their allies among the digital Gestapo were already doing their best to silence those who pushed back, weren’t they?
The controversy around Al Gore’s call to ban social media algorithms reflects a distinct disregard for freedom of expression while signaling a growing desire to have the state take a more active role in meddling with speech.
