https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/milikh-b...ree-speech

"...A Google internal memo leaked in 2018 called “The Good Censor” shows the company’s skepticism about the freedom of speech, claiming it has “become a social, economic, and political weapon.” The memo compares the “American tradition” to the “European tradition,” saying America prioritizes “free speech for democracy, not civility,” while the European tradition, “favors dignity over liberty and civility over freedom.”

According to this memo, Google openly supports the European tradition, and believes that all tech platforms are now moving in this direction. Google did not deny the authenticity of the memo’s contents. In response to its publication, right on cue, Google claimed that it is “committed to free expression.”

<Article then goes on to explain that "free expression" means being able to silence critics in its contemporary definition>

Ironically, the Europeans are the ones hammering Google with the multi-billion dollar judgements.

Private companies. No free speech requirement, at all. Don't use them if you don't like it.

(04-23-2019 09:46 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Private companies. No free speech requirement, at all. Don't use them if you don't like it.

Are wedding cake designers and bakers private companies too?

(04-23-2019 09:46 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Private companies. No free speech requirement, at all. Don't use them if you don't like it.

Works for me... then as a private company, they are responsible for all the content it publishes. Live streamed suicides, rapes, crime conspiracies generated through messenger, fraud, extramarital affairs, wrongful deaths, etc. They are either private or they aren't.

(04-23-2019 09:46 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Private companies. No free speech requirement, at all. Don't use them if you don't like it.

Its a question of monopolistic practices and collusion as well as deceptive advertising. They are potentially vulnerable on all 3 counts.

And if they are opposed to American values, they need to be exposed for that.

(04-23-2019 09:46 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Private companies. No free speech requirement, at all. Don't use them if you don't like it.

I agree. They're private companies offering a service. If you don't like the terms, don't use their service.

However.

If they're going to decide on their own what speech they consider "free" and what speech must be censored, then they should be held accountable for any actions/consequences that result from the "speech" that passed their muster.

They should also, to be blunt, cut the crap and tell people their results are censored and what the criteria is for censoring.

(04-23-2019 09:52 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(04-23-2019 09:46 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Private companies. No free speech requirement, at all. Don't use them if you don't like it.

Its a question of monopolistic practices and collusion as well as deceptive advertising. They are potentially vulnerable on all 3 counts.

And if they are opposed to American values, they need to be exposed for that.

Totally agree. I loathe FB really. If it weren't for keeping in touch with some relatives and for church and fitness activities, I'd have nothing to do with it.

And their app still sucks ass!

(04-23-2019 09:52 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(04-23-2019 09:46 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Private companies. No free speech requirement, at all. Don't use them if you don't like it.

Are wedding cake designers and bakers private companies too?

Of course. But that's irrelevant really. If FB is refusing to open accounts for minorities and other protected classes, then they need to be held accountable for violating their civil liberties.

It's so gross (and sad, really) that the alt-left is in such dire straights and so desperate to win politically, that they are eager to jump on board the selling out of long-standing American values and the gaslighting/brainwashing of silicon valley tech monopolies, because they think it gives them the slightest of advantages.

(04-23-2019 11:07 AM)Kronke Wrote:  It's so gross (and sad, really) that the alt-left is in such dire straights and so desperate to win politically, that they are eager to jump on board the selling out of long-standing American values and the gaslighting/brainwashing of silicon valley tech monopolies, because they think it gives them the slightest of advantages.

If they ever got out of their bubbles they would find that the vast majority of Americans are not SJWs. And although those tech firms cater to the sky screamers, because they scream the most, a lot of those guys are not really leftists.

(04-23-2019 09:46 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Private companies. No free speech requirement, at all. Don't use them if you don't like it.

This.

(04-23-2019 11:17 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(04-23-2019 11:07 AM)Kronke Wrote:  It's so gross (and sad, really) that the alt-left is in such dire straights and so desperate to win politically, that they are eager to jump on board the selling out of long-standing American values and the gaslighting/brainwashing of silicon valley tech monopolies, because they think it gives them the slightest of advantages.

If they ever got out of their bubbles they would find that the vast majority of Americans are not SJWs. And although those tech firms cater to the sky screamers, because they scream the most, a lot of those guys are not really leftists.

They'll push too far at some point. Just like it was never going to end with Alex Jones, media matters is now coming for Joe Rogan, and amazon post is coming for Ben Shapiro.

I've become more conscious of what tech I use. I deleted facebook years ago (you're crazy if you're still on there), and just recently deleted chrome. I downloaded Brave, which has a built-in ad blocker (make sure to turn it off for this site -- it's easy, just click their logo on the task bar and click "shields down"), is up to 8x faster than Chrome, and it creates a wallet for their crypto that you acquire just by browsing and you can donate to your favorite content creators.