Archie Moses
Well-Known Member
So, basically, you're not OK with Shapiro's "lies" but you're OK with him being labeled a Nazi?
Mmmkay. Voice of reason right here.
Do you see the problem here? (No, of course you don't.)
Alex Jones and Social Media Censorship
- Thread starter Saint Cy of JFC
- Start date
So, basically, you're not OK with Shapiro's "lies" but you're OK with him being labeled a Nazi?
Mmmkay. Voice of reason right here.
Do you see the problem here? (No, of course you don't.)
I disagree that Shapiro is a Nazi, and it's wrong to refer to him as such. Since that was the opinion of some random Google employee, and likely hyperbole, I'm not sure why I would be up in arms about it. I don't recall you complaining much about Obama being labeled a Muslim.
Shapiro supports many positions that are supported by modern-day Nazis, but no doubt also disagrees with many.
I don't think we would agree on what "the" problem is. I just checked, and Shapiro is still on Twitter, Facebook, and easily found on Google. what's your complaint here?
Archie Moses
Well-Known Member
Considering I'm an Obama supporter and I thought that was the dumbest thing ever to label him a Muslim, considering how publicly Christian he is.
That's cute you bring something completely irrelevant up while brushing this under the table the with comments like, "just a Google employee's opinion."
My complaint is the media's clear liberal bias and implications. You may not realize this, but Shapiro can still be on Google while they could clearly change their search engine to support their political bias.
It's like I could keep pointing out everything that is and could be potentially harmful, but I'm sure you'll look the other way. That's cool.
I'm just not one to support censorship.
Archie Moses
Well-Known Member
@One Brow how bout thoughts on this? This articulates it way better than I could. (I should probably mention, I don't know what the Hill's media bias is - I just enjoyed the article.)
https://thehill.com/opinion/technol...censorship-path?amp&__twitter_impression=true
https://thehill.com/opinion/technol...censorship-path?amp&__twitter_impression=true
I think it is carefully considered and mostly reasonable. I agree that the tech giants need to be cautious about whom to de-platform, and that it is really about the money for them.
Dumb, but not worth complaining about.
Is there some Google policy about Shapiro/Peterson you are complaining about?
Evidence? All I have seen is de-platforming of people who say the Sandy Hook families are actors and downplaying those who preach anti-vax nonsense. What actual person has had their profile/views altered for strictly political reasons?
You mean, totally unlike how trying to convince people that the families of the victims of a shooting is not harmful, or the pushing of anti-vax nonsense is not harmful?
Since there is no censorship here, that's not particularly relevant.
Archie Moses
Well-Known Member
Is there a Peterson/Shapiro policy? I don't know. If they're calling them Nazis behind closed doors, who knows what else they're doing.
Yes, there's lots of evidence. We can start with this.
Lastly, I want to make it clear that I think Alex Jones has a literal mental illness problem. Like, he's 100% KooKoo. If you haven't listened to Joe Rogan's podcast with him, if 4 hours of pure gold. For me, at least, it made me less angry at him because the dude has literally lost his mind. He's like a big kid that believes in interdimensional aliens and the government working on programs to explore interdimensions using the drug DMT to talk to machine elves.
He talks about Sandy Hook too. Basically, he says he's sorry for what he said and he was given bad information (no ****, Sherlock.) I don't care he was kicked off social media. I do care about the slippery slope of enforcing censorship though.
Enter Steven Crowder. I encourage you to read into that whole situation and get a clear perspective of how silly it is. #gaywonk, Carlos Maza, was baiting and playing a serious victim. He's like, the Milo of the left. He's a provocateur.
https://www.businessinsider.com/steven-crowder-youtube-speech-carlos-maza-explained-youtube-2019-6
#VoxAdpocalypse is garbage.
https://www.rt.com/usa/462679-google-shapiro-prager-peterson-nazis/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
I still think it's hard for me to believe you don't get the problem with this. I know you don't like Shapiro, Peterson (I don't know much about) and Prager (I know they make super conservative and corny YouTube videos) but come on, bro.
Archie Moses
Well-Known Member
There is, and you're burying your head in the sand to think this is the case.
There is but since it’s not a public entity they can censor people.
But yes, there is a growing trend to silence dissent and disagreement. To label things sexist, racist, bigoted...
Hell some radio personality even went after Toy Story 4.
If Amazon sells fleshlights at $42.50 each, and a private seller sells the same product with serial numbers sequential to those sold from Amazon for $12.50, do you think Amazon has the right to deny the private seller auction space? How about slapping an "Amazon Choice" tag at the top of your search for unmarital aid?
It doesn't matter what you think. Amazon does what the **** they want
Are you actively monitoring the Fleshlight market? Would trade on that market be considered fleshlight futures? I think that would be a sticky situation.
Archie Moses
Well-Known Member
What if Amazon makes decisions like this based on skin color, religion, sexuality, political affiliation?
Business can do what they want, but again, it becomes a slippery slope and is censorship