It seems Democrat Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar has decided to expand her bullying beyond her office staff.
She and some unknown House of Representatives sidekick – think Klobuchar as Scut Farkus and Joe Morelle of New York as her Grover Dill – have asked Amazon to censor Alexa.
In a letter to Jeff Bezos – you already know who he is – the Liedamic Duo point to a recent Washington Post story that reported the terrifying news that someone had asked Alexa a question about the 2020 election and it said something they did not like.
Specifically, this is what Alexa said that the election was “notorious for many incidents of irregularities and indications pointing to electoral fraud taking place in major metro centers.”
Since, as we all know everyone votes the way a disembodied voice coming from a table in the hallway tells them to, Klobuchar is demanding that Bezos must tell Alexa to knock it off.
According to the letter, “This spreading of election-related misinformation and disinformation is particularly troubling given the emerging use of artificial intelligence to mislead voters. With some ballots for the 2024 election being sent out as early as this December (um, speaking of misinformation, ballots in December 2023?), it is important that proactive measures are promptly taken so that voters can trust the information that is provided to them.”
To that end, they asked the following: “What steps have been taken to improve the accuracy of information repeated by Alexa? How is Amazon vetting responses from contributors, particularly responses pertaining to our elections? In advance of the 2024 elections, what additional protections does Amazon intend to implement to prevent the spread of election misinformation and disinformation?”
The Post story specifically calls out Rumble and Substack as sources that are particularly unreliable and, presumably, should never be referred to and/or have anything referenced from them and/or even allowed to exist.
Amy, I’m not a liar.
Nor are the vast majority of people who read and write on Substack. Most, in fact, take care with what they write and the readers are looking for different sources of information and opinion than cannot be found in the utterly state-captured media.
The reason you and the Post hate Substack is that you cannot control it and, in the Post’s case, it is a direct competitor for clicks and, therefore, money.
I am not a journalist – in fact, I loathe the term and have a gut aversion to anyone calling themselves a “journalist.” I am however not a mere “contributor,” as opposed to one of your verified news sources like the Post and the New York Times of Gaza hospital terrorist lies fame. I actually have a history of reporting truthfully on the important and the mundane. Currently, I would describe myself as an analytical polemicist, working with facts to make broader points in a way that is engaging to the reader.
Matt Taibbi of Titter Files fame is incensed by the Klobuchar missive (as he should be as he does speak truth to power at some actual risk to himself – remember, this is the guy who had an IRS agent show up at his house while he was testifying before Congress about censorship.)
Here’s Taibbi being not amused:
“Klobuchar wants Jeff Bezos to make sure Amazon’s home surveillance robots don’t spit out even occasional answers from a wider pool of real human beings, including thousands of independent contributors. The information landscape must be a pure monopoly of ‘verified news sources.’”
This Senator-to-billionaire communiqué isn’t illegal because she didn’t phrase it as an order or voice the implied threat of regulation, among other things. If Bezos ends up complying, however, I’ve half a mind to sue. Patience is wearing thin with the relentless determination of government figures — whether U.S. Cyber Command or a Minnesota Senator — to weed out independent media from the digital landscape. It’s not enough to have 99% of the informational space? They need all of it? “
Taibbi has even launched an effort to make Amy the face of the censorship-industrial complex, in large part because the issue is complex that maybe an evil mascot would help to clarify the public discussion:
“A problem when grappling with the censorship hydra is that it has no public face, no Tipper Gore or Jerry Falwell to personify the topic. Klobuchar, for reasons listed this morning and beyond, is right for this role. She needs to be Red Pencil Amy, Blacklist Amy, Amy “Thought Police” Klobuchar. And longshot or not, removal of her from office in next year’s election or even from Senate leadership positions is a worthwhile goal. The rest of Washington needs to read public sentiment about this issue through a colleague’s public relations dilemma.”
Well, I’m happy to put my support behind the effort.
As for a nickname, let’s see… Pay Me Klobuchar might work as censorship seems to go over big with the donor class.
Amy Snowjobuchar? That needs work.
But I definitely have the name for the movement as a whole:
The Center for Countering Digital Klobuchar.
P.S. - I’m leaving the comments open for nickname suggestions and just in case you haven’t seen a television on Christmas Day for 30 years, Scut Farkus was the bully from “A Christmas Story.” Grover Dill was his sidekick.
I wonder if referring to a superbly written amicus brief in support of 14 attorneys general in Texas v. Pennsylvania is considered a worthy source, or is "misinformation?" A brief written by the new Speaker of the House, by the way. It is far more detailed and substantiated than anything Sen. Klobuchar or her fellow travelers have regurgitated. https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163550/20201211132250339_Texas%20v.%20Pennsylvania%20Amicus%20Brief%20of%20126%20Representatives%20--%20corrected.pdf