Who determines what are FAKE NEWS and what are REAL NEWS?
If your answer is THE GOVERNMENT or THE MEDIA, you need to take the red pill and get out of the MATRIX.
I hope everyone would agree that REAL NEWS differs from FAKE NEWS based on THE FACTS and not what a politician says.
Why in the world would a politician push for a law that seeks to legislate what is FAKE NEWS and what is REAL NEWS?
The case of France’s trickle down dictatorship is one that has been coming down the pipeline for a while.
The latest chapter of this novel is Emanuelle Macron’s initiative to “avoid foreign interference in democratic electoral processes”.
According to Macron, it is necessary that the government tells the public what they can or should believe based on what is convenient for the government instead of letting people decide for themselves.
Macron, like most politicians, is a person primarily interested in political office for selfish or other narrow usually short-sighted reasons; therefore, his attempt to censor information.
In the same way that other governments have declared “war on drugs”, “war on terror” and “war on poverty” and failed miserably, Macron apparently plans to declare war on fake news and the mainstream media are loving it.
The current leader of France came to power without many obstacles.
He did not have to debate fundamental issues.
“The thrust of his campaign was a daily briefing slamming corruption alleged to be taking place among the political class in general,” says Theirry Meyssan. Nothing of substance.
“In addition to Macron’s unchallenged arrival, one must add the role played by the brainwashed and insouciant French electorate that voted to abolish the French nation. In five years France will exist only as a geographical location, a province in “Europe,” itself a province in global capitalism,” explains Paul Craig Roberts.
Elitism and Far-Right Advance to Runoff in France
Emanuelle Macron is a “former Rothschild prince, a self-styled centrist, an elitist establishment favorite,” explains Stephen J. Lendman.
His pledge to address high unemployment and social injustice, improve relations between French youths and police, stress education, promote gender equality socially and politically, among other domestic issues he discussed were ignored after his election. France is now more divided than before he rose to power.
International terrorism, in which France itself participates, is commanded and used – even against the country – by its government and certain of its NATO allies.
The French government, regardless of who is president is, is a European colony where globalist policies are imposed on the people.
In 2016, Prime Minister Manuel Valls, announced his use of Article 49.3 of the Constitution, to enable the suspension of the parliamentary process and the approval of a law by decree, after a tense meeting with his divided parliamentary group. “Enough games. I assume my responsibilities in the interests of the country “, he said.
Macron’s War on “FAKE NEWS”
Emmanuel Macron declared on Wednesday the war against false news and those who spread it.
In the speech to the press on the occasion of the New Year, the French president announced a law to control, limit and punish the propagation of so-called FAKE NEWS on social networks, during election campaigns, especially when issued by “foreign entities”.
Macron, who denounced the alleged attempt by Russian state media like Russia Today to destabilize his campaign in May, pointed to the fake news and the “illiberal democracies” that instigate them as a threat to press freedom.
Macron turned an old tradition into disuse – the call for journalists and correspondents in Paris to express their best wishes for the new year – in a high-voltage political declaration.
The law, which will be formalized in the coming weeks, will allow the “protection of the democratic life from these false news,” he said, and specified the definition:
“This propaganda articulated with thousands of accounts in social networks that in an instant expand all over the world, in all languages, invented riddles to dirty a politician, a personality, a public figure, a journalist”.
Planting doubts about Democracy
One of the most common practices that politicians use when wanting to push fear onto the public is to offer “proof” of how democracy is at risk, threatened by “external enemies”. Politicians have turned instigating fear into an art.
One case in point is Russia.
He did not mention Russia Today (RT), which has just started broadcasting television in France with French journalists, nor Sputnik, the other Russian media he accused of muddying the last presidential campaign.
He did not cite any specific country, although at another point in the speech, and when referring to “illiberal regimes” that threaten press freedom, he spoke about Russia and Turkey.
How the censorship will work
The law will focus only on electoral periods and allegedly seeks to strengthen controls to avoid attempts to influence the results.
First, the authorities that regulate the audiovisual sector will see their powers strengthened to prevent media controlled by foreign states from acting as destabilizing elements.
Second, it will force Internet platforms to be more transparent with respect to the sponsored content they publish, and which can be a vehicle for the transmission of false news.
The control must arrive, according to Macron, until making public the identity of those who control them.
Third, it will speed up the possibility of reporting a false news before a judge, who could eventually delete it, close the account that propagates it and even veto their access to the Internet.
In sum, Emanuelle Macron wants his government to have the power to censor anyone who they label dangerous to democracy, a producer of fake news or a foreign entity that “threatens” French interests.
The organization Reporters Without Borders (RSF) said in a statement that it will act when the text of the legislative proposal is public, but announced that “it will be vigilant about full respect for journalistic freedoms within the framework of these reforms.” In other words, not even RSF will challenge this legislation outside its framework. It will only do it within the limits it will impose on freedom of speech and freedom of the press.
“Controlling what can be said and who can say it: is France still a democracy if it gags its citizens? Very disturbing!” wrote Marine Le Pen, leader of the National Front and rival of Macron in the presidential elections last May.
Asked, after the speech, by the countries that had been victims and where exactly the threat came from, Macron responded:
“In our campaign and in the American campaign there were suspicions. That is why I want to turn new rules into law in the electoral context. IT consists in giving transparency to the information and being able to act quickly. It is not for me to decide where they come from, I am not the judge of these elements. I just want that we provide ourselves with rules that allow us to detect these fake news and neutralize them in an electoral context.”
Macron excluded journalists from RT and Sputnik from their campaign in 2017.
Once elected, in a press conference with Russian President Vladimir Putin, he accused them of acting not as information media, but as “organs of influence and propaganda.”
Macron’s electoral movement suffered a cyberattack and the theft and dissemination of thousands of internal messages.
Unlike in the campaign of the Democrat Hillary Clinton in the USA in 2016, the cyber-attack did not influence the result and Macron was elected president to the detriment of the country.
Now, as the elected leader of France, Macron is guilty of the same sins he once blamed on others:
He attacks and minimizes fundamental freedoms and human rights that in the European countries and the United States had been assumed to be irreversible.
Today, thanks to the ignorance of the French people and the audacity of politicians like Macron, the “illiberal democracies” have means and strategies to undermine fundamental freedoms and human rights based on boogeymen, invisible external enemies and non-existent conspiracies.
The common theme is always one: sow doubts about the democratic system.