Berlin Attack: ISIS Claims Responsibility

Aerial footage of the Berlin attack.

In the wake of atrocious terror attack in Berlin, Germany, where a lorry driver slaughter 12 people and severely injured 49 other, the islamic supremacy group, ISIS, has publicly claimed responsibility. This information was publicly stated through ISIS’s Amaq news agency which said that one of their “soldiers” was responsible.

The exact identity of the man who piloted the truck as yet remains a mystery, so it is not known definitively, as yet, whether or not this claim is in fact true or just a blustery attempt to garner hysteria from the German people’s and new recruits from members of their radicalized Muslim populace.

The German Interior Minster, Thomas de Maiziere released a public announcement stating that “several lines of investigation were being pursued.”

Regardless, the style of the attack certainly seems in keeping with ISIS’s previous terror attacks, nearly a mirror image of the Bastille Day cargo-truck attack in Nice, France which occurred earlier this very year. When will the politicians of Europe abandon their cynicism and naivete? When will they realize that their “progress” and egalitarian doctrines are creating a grand noose into which they eagerly scamper?

Probably never. This matter can only be resolved by those bold nationals who have the courage to cast off the yolk of their political and cultural dogmas and proudly say, “Germany for Germans and for no man other!”

You can see the video of the attack here:

You can find Kaiter Enless online here:

Facebook Employees Admit To Censoring Conservative News

Facebook users will be familiar with the sites “trending” page, typically featuring news. However, unlike many other websites, Facebook does not allow all material to flow naturally and rise to prominence in the news feed due to user interest. Rather, they utilize employees known as “news curators” who, true to their name, modify what can and, more importantly, what can not be seen by users. But these curators’ duties do not stop there, as recently, numerous former Facebook employees have broken their silence surrounding a series of rather dubious practices conducted by the social media behemoth.

First and foremost amongst these is the practice of injecting news stories into trending news feeds, regardless of whether or not they are popular enough to warrant a slot. In many cases the stories curators inject into the trending section are not even trending at all and often become top subjects of discussion among the site’s user-base. It’s like organizing a celebrity talk show where everyone is a crusty, mustard stained hobo but lauded by the baying crowd all the same due to the presentation alone. If these talk show hosts say that these people are famous and talented well then they must be, who, after all, would lie about that?

In addition, these same curators also expressly suppressed or omitted a wide variety of conservative news sites, such as Breitbart or Newsmax from the trending feed altogether. It should be said that there is nothing inherently troubling about a news aggregating organization expressing an ideological bias and then picking and choosing what stories they will and will not share based upon those principals. However, there is a marked problem when sites like Facebook are not clear about their ideological orientation and pretend to be but an impartial purveyor of information. This is the same problem I have with the prime-time dumpster fire that is CNN – their wolves in sheep’s clothing approach to information dissemination as well as their propensity for hyperbolic spin and outright falsity.

Facebook utilizes an algorithm which tracks stories and places them into the trending feed based upon their organically achieved popularity. This is publicly stated upon the site itself. Such a statement gives the impression that the site is impartial and herein lies the conundrum as it is manifestly not. This should not come as a surprise to those that are familiar with the hiring practices of the company or the ideological propensities of it’s CEO and co-founder, Mark “I’m working on censoring anti-immigration sentiment” Zuckerberg. For instance, the majority of the aforementioned news curators are primarily leftists straight out of Ivy League schools – there are clearly doctrinal expectations from the continued deployment of individuals from such backgrounds.

Ideology aside, there is another reason why Facebook is so energetically setting itself to artificially engineering the news – Twitter. One of Facebooks biggest competitors, Twitter has consistently beaten out Zuckerberg’s social network in regards to real-time news updates. Due this fact it stands to reason that these news curation groups and their subsequent modulation of the trending news feed is an outgrowth of market competition. The forces of capitalism and ideological dogmatism seem to be pushing Facebook in ever more disconcerting directions and as such should concern every American, not just users of the site. As I mentioned in a previous article about Facebook, the majority of adults get the majority of their news from social media sites. According to the Pew Research Center:

  • 6 out of 10 (62% of US adults) get their news primarily from social media sites
  • only 38% of adults say they never get news from social media
  • 70% of Reddit users get their news from that site
  • 66 % of Facebook users get their news from that site
  • 59 % of Twitter users get their news from that site
  • As of 2012 only 49% of US adults got their news from social media

As you can see from the last mote of information, there has been a marked growth in the correlation between news and social media in recent years. If this trend continues into the future then by 2020 (the time of the next elections) and we see a growth-correlation in news and social media of 13% (as was the case between 2012-2016) then 75% of all adults in the US will be getting all of their news primarily from social media. Whether or not this will end up being the case, social media and online news are undeniably the future of journalism. Given this likely eventuality, we should be ever more vigilant in our criticisms of such institutions as well as our search for alternative outlets.

[Editor’s note: Originally published by New Media Central]

Facebook Now Actively Fighting “Fake News”

[Editors note: originally written for New Media Central]

After the election the MSM collectively alleged that “fake news sites” had swung the election in Donald Trump’s favor. Mark Zuckerberg had scoffed at such claims, calling them “crazy” but has since radically changed his tune and since vowed to, “Take misinformation seriously.” However, Zuckerberg failed to elaborate further upon either a specific timeline or plan of action. This has incensed a wide variety of fact checking organizations such as Poynter Institute’s International Fact Checking Network whose leader Alexios Mantzarlis, has publically stated that Facebook is the internet’s foremost purveyor of “fake news.” Mr. Mantzarlis believes that Facebook is one of the only online organizations that has both the power, reach and influence to “push back” against the dissemination of false and misleading stories (or rather, stories that Mr. Mantzarlis simply believes to be false).

But Mantzarlis’ organization is far from alone in calling out Facebook. Politifact, and WaPo’s Fact Checker wrote a collective open letter to Mark Zuckerberg which called upon him to, “Start an open conversation on the principles that could underpin a more accurate news ecosystem on its News Feed.”

Despite what one’s feeling about the ongoing “fake news” scare happen to be, Facebook’s reaction to it could be quite tremendous. Though Facebook did not begin it’s online life as a news network it has since become one of the largest news aggregating sites on the web. For context, consider the fact that 66% (two thirds) of all Facebook users get their news from the site. Exptrapolating the data further, also consider that Facebook reaches around 67% of all adults in the United States [1]. This means, naturally, that the majority of adults in the United States get some of (around 44%), if not all, of their news off of Facebook.

There are numerous different proposals for the various ways in which Facebook could tackle this so-called “fake news,” including tagging all designated false news sites with a big red badge icon but leaving it up, or indexing designated sites and then having a hand-picked team of verifiers pull such sites out of subscribers newsfeed.

Zuckerburg has publicly posted that he and his company fully intend to “disrupt the fake news economy” as well as to cut off ad revenue to such sites. Regardless of whether or not you use Facebook, it’s reach and power will doubtless cause other similar social media sites to pay attention and very likely, follow in its footsteps. Something for all of you Facebook users out there to keep in mind is that plenty of websites which are perfectly legitimate, such as Breitbart and us here at New Media Central, have been designated as false news for purely political or financial reasons. Keep your wits about you.


  • Data mentioned comes from Pew Research polls conducted in Jan. 12 – Feb. 8 during 2016



Introduction to the Logos Club

Logos Club Primer

The Logos Club is a communal art and philosophy platform created for the dissemination of important ideas, images and stories too radical, controversial or otherwise taboo to be published elsewhere. We welcome upright individuals of all inclinations whom are possessed of ardor of character, introspection of mind and deftness of penmanship.

In a world of mass migration, shifting political alliances, erosion of cultural and linguistic cohesion and increased globalization it is increasingly important to ask, who one is, where one stands and what for. Hence the Logos Club vigorously tackles such ideas as Human Identity, Contemplation/Spiritualism, Nationalism, The Importance of Futurism, Sex, Evolution and the indispensability of empirical thought and order in all things.

Media we publish: 

  • Novels/short stories pertaining to the aforementioned topics
  • Manifestos/Pamphlets pertaining to the aforementioned topics
  • Essays/monographs pertaining to the aforementioned topics
  • Occasional videos pertaining to the aforementioned topics
  • Traditional/mixed/digital art pertaining to the aforementioned topics

Media we do not publish:

  • Pornographic materials (porn being distinct from erotica)
  • Material designed merely to shock
  • Deconstructionist/modernist/post-modernist works
  • Poorly edited/grammatically woesome works
  • Illogical screeds

All submissions may be made via the contact page.