(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....
True.
But, like the railroads before, we have to address the issue of market access as a society.
We are already there when it comes to the internet in my opinion and ISPs should be treated as a public utility.
pretty much....and again, I've never watched a single podcast of his other than a handful of Kronke's I've sifted through.....
he actually reminds me of a Rush wannabe....both are a tough listen long term, but some of what they say I agree with.....no differently than how I tap into msnbc just to get the gist of their position du jour in the a.m......
to me, this issue is about banning his blo-hard rhetoric purely based on political slant......that's simply wrong....same thing what you're seeing on college campuses today.....
once you create that divide of one vs. the other, there's no going back......
this is YUGE battle in my book for future generations.....
(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 $$$ derived from your web viewing habits. Let your imaginary money talk!
Sorry, I believe in the free market. If this move causes these companies to go bankrupt so be it. If it gives that turd Alex Jones a million more listeners so be it. Let the market decide who is right.
Count me as a person that thinks that internet infrastructure largely built by the government, big tech companies that use it and claim to be creating open platforms for people shouldn't be playing ministry of truth and be banning people for vague "hate speech" criteria.
(08-06-2018 07:47 PM)bobdizole Wrote: I'm glad to see all of you guys all of a sudden being pro regulation/big government. Pretending that social media is an actual service that needs to be regulated. Because digital addiction websites are the same as one phone, cable, electric companies in an area. You can get all the information you want from any of the billion websites you want out there including infowars.com
It's a business, don't like don't log into the site. They survive on advertising $$$ 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
Your argument lacks truth or logic.
There are specific platforms on the internet where 90% of the information and click flow inhabits. Silencing/blocking highly selected people from those platforms for wrong think is not a free market or freedom of speech.
You have no argument here. Not one with an ounce of truth or reality.
(This post was last modified: 08-06-2018 09:18 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 $$$ derived from your web viewing habits. Let your imaginary money talk!
Sorry, I believe in the free market. If this move causes these companies to go bankrupt so be it. If it gives that turd Alex Jones a million more listeners so be it. Let the market decide who is right.
Count me as a person that thinks that internet infrastructure largely built by the government, big tech companies that use it and claim to be creating open platforms for people shouldn't be playing ministry of truth and be banning people for vague "hate speech" criteria.
(08-06-2018 07:47 PM)bobdizole Wrote: I'm glad to see all of you guys all of a sudden being pro regulation/big government. Pretending that social media is an actual service that needs to be regulated. Because digital addiction websites are the same as one phone, cable, electric companies in an area. You can get all the information you want from any of the billion websites you want out there including infowars.com
It's a business, don't like don't log into the site. They survive on advertising $$$ 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
Your argument lacks truth or logic.
There are specific platforms on the internet where 90% of the information and click flow inhabits. Silencing/blocking highly selected people from those platforms for wrong think is not a free market or freedom of speech.
You have no argument here. Not one with an ounce of truth or reality.
True, government funded research did develop most of the technology that led to the modern internet but you would be a fool.to believe they played any substantial role in the development of the internet past the 90s .com boom. Today's internet backbone is maintained by less than 20 companies world wide. Those are the power players and when Tier 1 providers start censoring content I'll be concerned.
In the mean time just because the apps/websites that people are most obsessed with now are deciding they don't like certain content I'm not going to start crying for government control. They are private businesses and they answer to their customers and shareholders. Remember the government changes with who is in power and I don't want a select group to control how our businesses are run outside of physical safety.
Or to put in perspective of your posts on the sub forum. There are other bakers. You don't like what this Baker is doing find another one that fits your lifestyle. Who cares if the baker you want is the best in town, you have a choice. Here try this link
This is just the next logical step for the progressive left. Book burning, banning alcohol, banning speech......what’s next?
Banks refusing to service conservative citizens? Insurance companies denying conservatives homeowners and car insurance? Healthcare denied to conservatives? Harassing conservatives at restaurants and on the street? Confiscation of income?
(08-06-2018 10:08 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote: This is just the next logical step for the progressive left. Book burning, banning alcohol, banning speech......what’s next?
Banks refusing to service conservative citizens? Insurance companies denying conservatives homeowners and car insurance? Healthcare denied to conservatives? Harassing conservatives at restaurants and on the street? Confiscation of income?
Well they are already doing your 2nd to last part and most of the progs want socialism so that would fulfill the last. I don't see many libs banning alcohol, they love their wine parties and craft beer. It's a catch 22, as soon as we regulate the internet everyone loses. I say let the internet frontier remain wild. There will always be idiots that believe the crazy stuff but I never want the government of this country to have a say in how the internet is ran beyond enforcing current law. If Congress passed laws that further regulate so be it, that's the law of the land.
(08-06-2018 09:56 PM)bobdizole Wrote: True, government funded research did develop most of the technology that led to the modern internet but you would be a fool.to believe they played any substantial role in the development of the internet past the 90s .com boom. Today's internet backbone is maintained by less than 20 companies world wide. Those are the power players and when Tier 1 providers start censoring content I'll be concerned.
In the mean time just because the apps/websites that people are most obsessed with now are deciding they don't like certain content I'm not going to start crying for government control. They are private businesses and they answer to their customers and shareholders. Remember the government changes with who is in power and I don't want a select group to control how our businesses are run outside of physical safety.
Or to put in perspective of your posts on the sub forum. There are other bakers. You don't like what this Baker is doing find another one that fits your lifestyle. Who cares if the baker you want is the best in town, you have a choice. Here try this link
No one is buying this illogical and fallacious argument.
Bakers are everywhere, there is not a central place that controls 90% of bakeries shutting selected people out for wrong think. We are not talking about scattered individual sites, we are talking about the largest social platforms on the net that have a huge monopoly over the flow of information already.
No matter how much you argue or spin things, that is still the key issue here.
Your position is grossly flawed and void of reality.
(This post was last modified: 08-07-2018 01:14 AM by ericsrevenge76.)
(08-06-2018 10:08 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote: This is just the next logical step for the progressive left. Book burning, banning alcohol, banning speech......what’s next?
Banks refusing to service conservative citizens? Insurance companies denying conservatives homeowners and car insurance? Healthcare denied to conservatives? Harassing conservatives at restaurants and on the street? Confiscation of income?
Well they are already doing your 2nd to last part and most of the progs want socialism so that would fulfill the last. I don't see many libs banning alcohol, they love their wine parties and craft beer. It's a catch 22, as soon as we regulate the internet everyone loses. I say let the internet frontier remain wild. There will always be idiots that believe the crazy stuff but I never want the government of this country to have a say in how the internet is ran beyond enforcing current law. If Congress passed laws that further regulate so be it, that's the law of the land.
I’m sorry I thought everyone knew that Woodrow Wilson’s progressives were behind prohibition.
"...Mr. Watson likened American news outlets and social media outlets to the authoritarian governments and accused them of censorship.
“Whether you love or loathe Infowars, this now confirms that Big Tech is working with legacy media to silence independent media,” he wrote. “In places like Russia, the government shuts down the press, in America, CNN, Apple and Facebook fulfill that role.”
In a follow-up tweet, Mr. Watson included a comparison to China. “This is Chinese-style web control. Here and now. In the west,” he said.
Liberal activists and some news networks had called for Mr. Jones to be restricted or kicked off Twitter as well.
Yet other major players, including WikiLeaks, pushed back. They said Infowars “has frequent nonsense” but also provides a valuable critique of government power.
“Which publisher in the world with millions of subscribers is next to be wiped out for cultural transgression?” WikiLeaks wondered on Twitter.
"...Mr. Watson likened American news outlets and social media outlets to the authoritarian governments and accused them of censorship.
“Whether you love or loathe Infowars, this now confirms that Big Tech is working with legacy media to silence independent media,” he wrote. “In places like Russia, the government shuts down the press, in America, CNN, Apple and Facebook fulfill that role.”
In a follow-up tweet, Mr. Watson included a comparison to China. “This is Chinese-style web control. Here and now. In the west,” he said.
Liberal activists and some news networks had called for Mr. Jones to be restricted or kicked off Twitter as well.
Yet other major players, including WikiLeaks, pushed back. They said Infowars “has frequent nonsense” but also provides a valuable critique of government power.
“Which publisher in the world with millions of subscribers is next to be wiped out for cultural transgression?” WikiLeaks wondered on Twitter.
Best response I've seen so far
First they came for Infowars, and I didn't speak up because I'm not InfoWars
THen they DIDN"T COME for me, because I don't present news stories calling greiving Newtown parents of murdered infants crisis actors
pretty much....and again, I've never watched a single podcast of his other than a handful of Kronke's I've sifted through.....
he actually reminds me of a Rush wannabe....both are a tough listen long term, but some of what they say I agree with.....no differently than how I tap into msnbc just to get the gist of their position du jour in the a.m......
to me, this issue is about banning his blo-hard rhetoric purely based on political slant......that's simply wrong....same thing what you're seeing on college campuses today.....
once you create that divide of one vs. the other, there's no going back......
this is YUGE battle in my book for future generations.....
Liberals believe they have celebrated a victory; when in reality, they are celebrating their own defeat.
Liberals believe they are celebrating a victory when in reality they are cutting the rope that they will hang themselves with (metaphorically speaking).
Liberals are claiming that they are free, yet I hear their chains rattle.
(This post was last modified: 08-07-2018 06:50 AM by thespiritof1976.)
"...Mr. Watson likened American news outlets and social media outlets to the authoritarian governments and accused them of censorship.
“Whether you love or loathe Infowars, this now confirms that Big Tech is working with legacy media to silence independent media,” he wrote. “In places like Russia, the government shuts down the press, in America, CNN, Apple and Facebook fulfill that role.”
In a follow-up tweet, Mr. Watson included a comparison to China. “This is Chinese-style web control. Here and now. In the west,” he said.
Liberal activists and some news networks had called for Mr. Jones to be restricted or kicked off Twitter as well.
Yet other major players, including WikiLeaks, pushed back. They said Infowars “has frequent nonsense” but also provides a valuable critique of government power.
“Which publisher in the world with millions of subscribers is next to be wiped out for cultural transgression?” WikiLeaks wondered on Twitter.
Best response I've seen so far
First they came for Infowars, and I didn't speak up because I'm not InfoWars
THen they DIDN"T COME for me, because I don't present news stories calling greiving Newtown parents of murdered infants crisis actors
They were murdered children Tom. If you are looking for infanticide then it would be at abortion clinics and not at Sandy Hook.
pretty much....and again, I've never watched a single podcast of his other than a handful of Kronke's I've sifted through.....
he actually reminds me of a Rush wannabe....both are a tough listen long term, but some of what they say I agree with.....no differently than how I tap into msnbc just to get the gist of their position du jour in the a.m......
to me, this issue is about banning his blo-hard rhetoric purely based on political slant......that's simply wrong....same thing what you're seeing on college campuses today.....
once you create that divide of one vs. the other, there's no going back......
this is YUGE battle in my book for future generations.....
Liberals believe they have celebrated a victory; when in reality, they are celebrating their own defeat.
Liberals believe they are celebrating a victory when in reality they are cutting the rope that they will hang themselves with (metaphorically speaking).
Liberals are claiming that they are free, yet I hear their chains rattle.
They are progressives. They have broken free from liberal ideas. They are simply programmed progressives who dehumanize anyone they don't agree with. Pretty much Alex Jones on leftist steroids.
pretty much....and again, I've never watched a single podcast of his other than a handful of Kronke's I've sifted through.....
he actually reminds me of a Rush wannabe....both are a tough listen long term, but some of what they say I agree with.....no differently than how I tap into msnbc just to get the gist of their position du jour in the a.m......
to me, this issue is about banning his blo-hard rhetoric purely based on political slant......that's simply wrong....same thing what you're seeing on college campuses today.....
once you create that divide of one vs. the other, there's no going back......
this is YUGE battle in my book for future generations.....
Liberals believe they have celebrated a victory; when in reality, they are celebrating their own defeat.
Liberals believe they are celebrating a victory when in reality they are cutting the rope that they will hang themselves with (metaphorically speaking).
Liberals are claiming that they are free, yet I hear their chains rattle.
They are progressives. They have broken free from liberal ideas. They are simply programmed progressives who dehumanize anyone they don't agree with. Pretty much Alex Jones on leftist steroids.
Even "normie" youtubers like Philip DeFranco and boogie2988 (both liberals), whose audiences skew democrat, come down on the side of supporting Jones in that they disagree with his opinions, but also disagree with no-platforming him, despite it being their right (which I think is debatable, given the fact that these companies partner with the government, and that it was a coordinated campaign between mainstream media and democratic politicians to silence a competitor and political opponent).
/
Coordinated Purge: Infowars Simultaneously Banned From Youtube, Apple, & Facebook
![[Image: Dj_r8GgU8AIWqWz?format=jpg]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dj_r8GgU8AIWqWz?format=jpg)
![[Image: DkDiD2fU8AI8p5L.jpg]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DkDiD2fU8AI8p5L.jpg)
![[Image: DkDiPrEUcAA-hi0.jpg]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DkDiPrEUcAA-hi0.jpg)