By J. D. Heyes, editor-in-chief

(National Sentinel) Censorship: In recent days Facebook deleted a page belonging to Britain First, along with those of party leader Paul Golding and deputy leader Jayda Fransen, for repeated violations of the site’s “Community Standards.”

In a notice posted online, the company said that they had been given a “written final warning” before the actions were taken, but that they “continued to post content that violates” the standards, and in particular, rules against hate speech.

Their ‘crime?’ They’re opposed to their country’s virtual open-door policy to Muslims, many of whom are radicalized who have committed numerous acts of terrorism in Britain since 2001.

By caving to British government pressure, Facebook is lending credence to the idiocy that no one should be permitted to mention the ethnicity of those who are committing acts of terror against them because that’s “hate speech.”

Meanwhile, the social media giant has no problem allowing pages belonging to hard-Left Antifa, whose members have been designated domestic terrorists by the U.S. government, to remain online.

The reality is, Facebook and other social media behemoths like YouTube and Twitter have launched a censorship offensive against conservative and pro-Trump speech. That’s why the “far Right” is taken down but the “far Left” is allowed to remain online.

A new analysis by The Western Journal confirms this:

Facebook’s much-publicized demotion of publishers’ content in users’ news feeds has negatively impacted conservative-leaning publishers significantly more than liberal-leaning outlets, an analysis by The Western Journal has revealed.

Liberal publishers have gained about 2 percent more web traffic from Facebook than they were getting prior to the algorithm changes implemented in early February.

On the other hand, conservative publishers have lost an average of nearly 14 percent of their traffic from Facebook.

This is having a real-world impact on actual publishers, including The National Sentinel, where I serve as editor-in-chief. Where our stories used to ‘reach’ thousands, today many stories only reach audiences in the double digits, despite their popularity on-site.

Live Fire Original

The changes to Facebook’s algorithm — intentional or not — have nonetheless had the mysterious effect of impacting conservative news much more than liberal news, and on the largest social media platform in the world. This is not only very likely having a negative impact on the political debate because the public is not being adequately informed, but decisions are probably being made — by voters, policymakers, and elected leaders — on less than complete information.

Case in point: In the immediate aftermath of the Trump-Republican tax cuts, which applied to companies, yes, but also to more than 90 percent of American wage earners, most Americans were opposed to them because they believed the Left-leaning media reports that only big corporations would be affected and that ordinary Americans would see a tax increase.

Now, social media giants like Facebook — which is not shunting “mainstream media” outlets which pushed that tax lie — will be contributing to misinformation campaigns rather than fighting them, as the site originally pledged to do.

Meaning you will get less information about issues and thus be unable to reach a truly informed opinion about them.

But the important thing to note is that Facebook’s actions will have negative implications far beyond its own site.

The algorithm change “has ramifications that, in the short term, are causing publishers to downsize or fold up completely, and in the long term could swing elections in the United States and around the world toward liberal politicians and policies,” The Western Journal reported.

That’s not hyperbole. Facebook banned Austin Peterson, a Republican challenger to incumbent U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., for 30 days recently after he promoted an AR-15 giveaway to his supporters by holding up a hand-drawn picture of a rifle.

Facebook can do what it wants as a private company. But the social media giant can’t say what it’s doing is having a similar negative impact on both liberal and conservative voices, because that’s simply untrue.

Don’t let your favorite news be banned! Stay up-to-date at the very uncensored

A version of this report first appeared at

We need your help to fight social media censorship! Find out how by clicking here!

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x