(08-06-2018 05:27 PM)Kronke Wrote: lol wut is happening
LOL.
Next thing you know he'll be banned from farmersonly.com
----
Private business, private rules. Wut? Some of y'all thought that private property rights only extend to conservative decisions by companies?
there's quite a difference between facecrap, twitter twat,xs and the other ones vs. porn....
I'd love to see you argue that one in court.......
btw, all you had to do was stop with the second line item.......that was actually funny....
If Jones sues, I would imagine that the Masterpiece Cake, and the Hobby Lobby cases will figure into the pleadings, if it doesn't get summarily squashed before trial.
it'll be the latter IMO....and by that, I mean the former will will not be allowed....
one could read your comment either way.....
I don't think the suit even touches the latter in concept.....
if he files suit, it's going to tap into a entire entire other arena of issues that will make that like stepping on a crack break mommies back......
you're going to see some constitutional law play out with this one on entire other scale coupled with new/revised legislation......
(This post was last modified: 08-06-2018 05:57 PM by stinkfist.)
(08-06-2018 04:51 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote: This isn't the government. These are private businesses. Jones has zero recourse here, other than to whine.
Well since you're suddenly pro-business for a change...
You've made extremely racist and hateful comments against white LGBT people during your constant support of Muslims murdering innocent LGBT individuals around the world. You are promoting hatred of a group based on immutable characteristics. And I think it's about time that your hatred ends.
I'll donate $1,000 to this site if you are permanently banned and removed from the site. georgia_tech_swagger knows I'm good for it and I'll actually follow through on my word.
Since this is a private business, he can do whatever he wants and you have zero recourse. You can start your own sports forum to talk with people about sports and politics.
(08-06-2018 04:51 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote: This isn't the government. These are private businesses. Jones has zero recourse here, other than to whine.
Well since you're suddenly pro-business for a change...
You've made extremely racist and hateful comments against white LGBT people during your constant support of Muslims murdering innocent LGBT individuals around the world. You are promoting hatred of a group based on immutable characteristics. And I think it's about time that your hatred ends.
I'll donate $1,000 to this site if you are permanently banned and removed from the site. georgia_tech_swagger knows I'm good for it and I'll actually follow through on my word.
Since this is a private business, he can do whatever he wants and you have zero recourse. You can start your own sports forum to talk with people about sports and politics.
Quote:Big tech’s coordinated purge of InfoWars — which was hit by bans from Apple, Facebook, Spotify and YouTube in rapid succession — did not occur in a vacuum. On this issue, Silicon Valley bowed to CNN journalists and Democrat politicians who ceaselessly lobbied for the site to be censored.
It’s a sign of how the concentration of power in America has shifted from big government to big tech that politicians are now lobbying tech companies rather than the other way round, but that’s exactly what happened over the course of the past few months, as Democrats applied relentless pressure on Facebook and other Silicon Valley giants to censor InfoWars.
Chief among them was Democratic Congressman Ted Deutch (D-FL), who demanded that a Facebook representative “explain” their decision not to ban InfoWars at a House Judiciary Committee hearing on social media censorship last month. Calling Jones as “well-known conspiracy theorist” whose “brand is bullying,” Deutch also demanded Google’s representative explain how many strikes it would take for a channel on Google-owned YouTube to be deleted.
He then asked Google’s representative if they thought conspiracy theories were a “problem,” and asked her to explain the company’s planned solutions. It seems that YouTube has now come up with a solution: ban the channels that Rep. Deutch objects to.
At a previous hearing on social media censorship, Deutch, who represents Parkland, Florida, attacked tech companies for allowing “vile and outrageous and offensive garbage” on their platforms.
Multiple other congressional Democrats, including Reps. Jerrold Nadler, Jim Hines, and Ted Lieu have attacked the very idea of big tech censorship, calling Republican concerns a “conspiracy theory” and defending the right of tech giants to censor whomever they want.
Far-left media also played a role in demanding tech giants appoint themselves as the arbiters of free speech. Here’s the Guardian attacking Facebook for continuing to host InfoWars, and here’s BuzzFeed’s Joe Bernstein wondering why Twitter hasn’t followed Facebook, YouTube, Spotify and Apple in today’s purge. Bernstein was retweeted by CNN’s Oliver Darcy by the way.
Kudos to those of the left speaking out against this. Its vital for all our sakes you speak out as well. I know I don't even listen or pay attention to AJ, but coordinated purges like this at this level should raise red flags for both sides.
(08-06-2018 07:18 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote: The ban is about nothing more than shutting Jones up.
It brings up interesting questions about some of these platforms and their need to be regulated.
what branch or body would regulate???
certainly you're not suggesting we need another branch of shite.....
I really don't understand how this isn't a clear cut 1st amendment issue that could tie into anti-trust violations by attempting political coercion.....
you're the lawyer.....help me out how that isn't the crux what you argue in defense....
(08-06-2018 07:35 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote: Kudos to those of the left speaking out against this. Its vital for all our sakes you speak out as well. I know I don't even listen or pay attention to AJ, but coordinated purges like this at this level should raise red flags for both sides.
I'm actually glad the gloms have done this......maybe now we'll begin seeing action where it needs to begin.....
just think if cankles had won............just, oh my......
(This post was last modified: 08-06-2018 07:44 PM by stinkfist.)
I'm glad to see all of you guys all of a sudden being pro regulation/big government. Pretending that social media is an actual service that needs to be regulated. Because digital addiction websites are the same as one phone, cable, electric companies in an area. You can get all the information you want from any of the billion websites you want out there including infowars.com
It's a business, don't like don't log into the site. They survive on advertising $$$ derived from your web viewing habits. Let your imaginary money talk!
Sorry, I believe in the free market. If this move causes these companies to go bankrupt so be it. If it gives that turd Alex Jones a million more listeners so be it. Let the market decide who is right.
(08-06-2018 12:09 PM)JDTulane Wrote: Private companies are not forced to host content that violates their guidelines.
CSNbbs has posting guidelines. The SpinRoom has posting guidelines. Sounds like a straw broke the camel's back and when one media entity started the removal, calls for the rest to follow suit came in.
He had been on Youtube since the beginning, over 13 years. 2.5 million subscribers. Gold-level, verified, partner creator. Why all of a sudden?
What's more likely -- that he just recently crossed some arbitrary line, or these tech firms are cracking down on right-of-center speech in attempt to meddle in the upcoming elections?
That's the sick thing, you brainwashed leftists will support this because you see it as a "win".
It's most likely about the Sandy Hook family. And when you just make **** up, you have to face the consequences. Sorry Al. You made this bed.
The sandy hook families claimed he sent people to their houses to harass them. He never did any such thing.
What happens if/when he WINS those lawsuits? Many of them have already been dismissed, very hard to prove defamation.
Irrelevant to my point really. You're not denying that he just made this **** up about them being complicit in a fabricated massacre, are you?
I don't know if the massacre was fabricated (and neither do you, BTW), but I DO know crisis actors were used, which I find appalling, and a bit "boy cries wolf"-ish.
(08-06-2018 07:47 PM)bobdizole Wrote: I'm glad to see all of you guys all of a sudden being pro regulation/big government. Pretending that social media is an actual service that needs to be regulated. Because digital addiction websites are the same as one phone, cable, electric companies in an area. You can get all the information you want from any of the billion websites you want out there including infowars.com
It's a business, don't like don't log into the site. They survive on advertising $$$ derived from your web viewing habits. Let your imaginary money talk!
% of the inf
Sorry, I believe in the free market. If this move causes these companies to go bankrupt so be it. If it gives that turd Alex Jones a million more listeners so be it. Let the market decide who is right.
Dude spare us the oversimplified low-level spin job.
Virtually no one here supports ZERO regulation on anything. None of us should be supporting such sweeping purges of wrongthink. Even the people we disagree with should have the same access to these platforms as everyone else.
THAT is a free market that lets people decide for themselves. Not silencing people from engaging where 90% of the information flow is.
(This post was last modified: 08-06-2018 07:59 PM by ericsrevenge76.)
(08-06-2018 07:47 PM)bobdizole Wrote: I'm glad to see all of you guys all of a sudden being pro regulation/big government. Pretending that social media is an actual service that needs to be regulated. Because digital addiction websites are the same as one phone, cable, electric companies in an area. You can get all the information you want from any of the billion websites you want out there including infowars.com
It's a business, don't like don't log into the site. They survive on advertising $$$ derived from your web viewing habits. Let your imaginary money talk!
Sorry, I believe in the free market. If this move causes these companies to go bankrupt so be it. If it gives that turd Alex Jones a million more listeners so be it. Let the market decide who is right.
that's the point of my post above yours......no.....just hell no!!!
(08-06-2018 07:35 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote: Kudos to those of the left speaking out against this. Its vital for all our sakes you speak out as well. I know I don't even listen or pay attention to AJ, but coordinated purges like this at this level should raise red flags for both sides.
I'm actually glad the gloms have done this......maybe now we'll begin seeing action where it needs to begin.....
just think if cankles had won............just, oh my......
Perhaps this will bring a positive outcome in the end. Lets hope
(08-06-2018 07:18 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote: The ban is about nothing more than shutting Jones up.
It brings up interesting questions about some of these platforms and their need to be regulated.
what branch or body would regulate???
certainly you're not suggesting we need another branch of shite.....
I really don't understand how this isn't a clear cut 1st amendment issue that could tie into anti-trust violations by attempting political coercion.....
you're the lawyer.....help me out how that isn't the crux what you argue in defense....
Executive branch through the administrative apparatus.
Trust laws don't really have much application to anything regarding politics.
What we are talking about is more along the lines of radio, railroads, etc.
(08-06-2018 07:47 PM)bobdizole Wrote: I'm glad to see all of you guys all of a sudden being pro regulation/big government. Pretending that social media is an actual service that needs to be regulated. Because digital addiction websites are the same as one phone, cable, electric companies in an area. You can get all the information you want from any of the billion websites you want out there including infowars.com
It's a business, don't like don't log into the site. They survive on advertising $$$ derived from your web viewing habits. Let your imaginary money talk!
% of the inf
Sorry, I believe in the free market. If this move causes these companies to go bankrupt so be it. If it gives that turd Alex Jones a million more listeners so be it. Let the market decide who is right.
Dude spare us the oversimplified low-level spin job.
Virtually no one here supports ZERO regulation on anything. None of us should be supporting such sweeping purges of wrongthink. Even the people we disagree with should have the same access to these platforms as everyone else.
THAT is a free market that lets people decide for themselves. Not silencing people from engaging where 90% of the information flow is.
So if you are successful enough in a free market that no one else was the government should be free to reel you in? Just curious because that sure seems like a damn good hindrance of everything that has made America successful. Do your best to create a product that everyone relies on so the government can take control of it so they can control it.
"Dude" spare me the partisan bs because it doesn't fit your narrative. It's a free market or not and until anti trust laws catch up with times don't blame companies for doing what they think is right whether we do or not
(08-06-2018 07:18 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote: The ban is about nothing more than shutting Jones up.
It brings up interesting questions about some of these platforms and their need to be regulated.
what branch or body would regulate???
certainly you're not suggesting we need another branch of shite.....
I really don't understand how this isn't a clear cut 1st amendment issue that could tie into anti-trust violations by attempting political coercion.....
you're the lawyer.....help me out how that isn't the crux what you argue in defense....
Executive branch through the administrative apparatus.
Trust laws don't really have much application to anything regarding politics.
What we are talking about is more along the lines of radio, railroads, etc.
while I somewhat agree....
this is becoming more and more about censoring political speech via a delivery mechanism that is essentially a monopoly.....also, with radio the knob can always be changed to find varying opinions....
on the internet (where most traffic is these days), if a handful of sites control 95+% of viewership and begin to censor based on political perspective, that introduces an entire other argument that has already been legislated as illegal.....
this one's going to be very interesting to watch play out....
/
Coordinated Purge: Infowars Simultaneously Banned From Youtube, Apple, & Facebook
![[Image: giphy.gif]](https://media.giphy.com/media/exQrMRVK2x9rW/giphy.gif)
![[Image: QEVjU03.png]](https://i.imgur.com/QEVjU03.png)
![[Image: Captain-Kirk-chris-pine-as-james-t-kirk-...00-206.gif]](http://images6.fanpop.com/image/photos/34500000/Captain-Kirk-chris-pine-as-james-t-kirk-34518587-500-206.gif)
![[Image: alex-jones-cnn-oliver-darcy-ted-deutch-640x480.jpg]](https://media.breitbart.com/media/2018/08/alex-jones-cnn-oliver-darcy-ted-deutch-640x480.jpg)
