Alex Jones and Social Media Censorship

[Deleted member 365]

I just want to point out that you’ve done a fantastic job at refuting a point when your two likes are @The Thriller and I.

Lol

 

[Deleted member 365]

He sure did. He's just another liberal hippie with an anti-conservative bias against white males

He’s also a globalist leftist. You forgot those two labels. Liberal hippie globalist leftist.

 

[Harambe]

He’s also a globalist leftist. You forgot those two labels. Liberal hippie globalist leftist.

You are correct! My apologies, and thank you for having my back!

 

[Deleted member 365]

You are correct! My apologies, and thank you for having my back!

Just doin my part to help!

 

[Hotdog]

He sure did. He's just another liberal hippie with an anti-conservative bias against white males

I'm not quite sure what this argument has morphed into; but access to Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and other social media platforms are not human rights. They're all online entities that grant you access to their services as long as you follow their terms and conditions.

Did Jason violate DutchJazz's human rights when he banned him from JFC?

If someone yells fire in a crowded theater, there is a chance someone will be injured in the likely ensuing stampede. I don't think we protect that type of "free speech". I think we should hold responsible anyone who would deliberately trigger something that causes injury to other human beings. In this episode of This American Life, we learn of how one father was affected by Jones' Sandy Hook fiction. I should think Jones should be held responsible for triggering this degree of harm on a human being. I don't understand why saying what Jones did is despicable and he should not be allowed to do this, should not be provided a platform to hurt other human beings this way, would make me or anyone else a "****ing douche bag leftist communist bitch". I should think it would instead make me a thinking, feeling human being with some degree of empathy and compassion for a father who does not deserve this, on top of the murder of his child.

All this talk about free speech and censorship, yet it seems to me that you argue from the position of someone who simply does not understand the difference between right and wrong.
Instead I'm a "douche bag leftist communist bitch". That's really ****** up, man.

https://www.thisamericanlife.org/670/beware-the-jabberwock

If you nutcake InfoWar people want to listen to your scumbag echo chamber, create your own Facebook or twitter. And with that platform you can create your own set of rules and guidelines. It’s still a free country!

The first amendment is still applicable here. Facebook and twitter have a right to set their rules. If you violate their rules and become banned, that’s fine. You can create your own social media platform. The first amendment doesn’t give you immunity from consequences of violating Facebook’s and Twitter’s rules.

Go ahead @babe and @hack create your own twitterverse. If you nutcakes think your views are so popular, create your own platform and become a billionaire, like Zuckerberg. What better way to get back at that leftist commie millennial PC meanie head? Get off your lazy asses, stop bitching, put your superior race into action, and be the solution.

You can call your platform after something representative of you. Here are some ideas:“The Stormer”, “Nazi Book”, “Deplorables R Us”, “Butthurt Morons Jealous of AOC”, “Sexually Frustrated White Dudes Living in their Parent’s Basement”, “Desperate for Attention,” “Dreamin of a 3some with Pepe and Cassandra Fairbanks”, or “Twits.”

You’ll be rich in no time and you won’t have to be bothered with any leftist commies! Yay!

I believe babe recently visited Gab, and found it not to his liking.

A few things here..

Im sure you all would agree that anti-discrimination laws are a good thing right? We dont like when businesses discriminate against certain people right?

Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter are all monopolies right? Do we all agree with that? Im sure we all do because its not even an argument. Are we now ok with monopolies?

Can we agree that these big tech companies have become a piblic square of sorts now? Because they kind of have.

Are the companies publishers or platforms? That's something that needs to be sorted out.
https://www.city-journal.org/html/platform-or-publisher-15888.html


What his hate speech? What is offensive? Who decides these things? Where is the line drawn? Who decides what the truth is?

These are complicated issues. Its not as cut and dry as go get your own big tech company if you dont like it. You guys just dont care now because its working in your favor or to your liking. Thats a bad idea to be ok with such things.

People want to make the case that Alex Jones is getting crazy people to harrass Sandy Hook families. Well its just as easy to argue that "sensationalism" news outlets like CNN are creating riots in the streets by stirring up emotions in crazy people. None of you seem to care about that. Why are they allowed to do that?

 

[Harambe]

A non-government company can do as they please. And they're going to. Banned? suck it. Don't like someone banned? Don't use the service.

 

[Hotdog]

A non-government company can do as they please. And they're going to. Banned? suck it. Don't like someone banned? Don't use the service.

So you are ok with a store serving whites only?

 

[Harambe]

So you are ok with a store serving whites only?

That's not the case at all. I will be happy to leverage the only power I have; not giving them my business.

 

[One Brow]

A few things here..

Im sure you all would agree that anti-discrimination laws are a good thing right? We dont like when businesses discriminate against certain people right?

I'm much more sensitive to discrimination against socially disadvantaged/oppressed groups, people who suffer from medical conditions, etc. However, I have no problem with private companies discriminating against people who yell at you with no provocation, or carry weaponry, or various other behaviors.

Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter are all monopolies right? Do we all agree with that? Im sure we all do because its not even an argument. Are we now ok with monopolies?

The very existence of Gab says otherwise.

Further, historically, the problem with monopolies was the price controls. They would use their power to raise prices beyond what a competitive market would bear. By contrast, Facebook/Youtube/Twitter/etc. are all free. The problems I have with them are of a very different sort.

Can we agree that these big tech companies have become a piblic square of sorts now? Because they kind of have.

Traditionally, a public square is a place owned by and controlled by the government. You're not advocating for a government takeover of Facebook/Youtube/Twitter/etc., right? Neither am I.

Are the companies publishers or platforms? That's something that needs to be sorted out.
https://www.city-journal.org/html/platform-or-publisher-15888.html

The second paragraph of your link is based on a false assumption. As Twitter, et. al., has been quite clear about, they ban based on violations of terms of service, not on political opinions.

These are complicated issues. Its not as cut and dry as go get your own big tech company if you dont like it. You guys just dont care now because its working in your favor or to your liking. Thats a bad idea to be ok with such things.

You mean, the way you only care about people being shut down when you (falsely) believe it affects your side more than others?

People want to make the case that Alex Jones is getting crazy people to harrass Sandy Hook families. Well its just as easy to argue that "sensationalism" news outlets like CNN are creating riots in the streets by stirring up emotions in crazy people. None of you seem to care about that. Why are they allowed to do that?

Comparing the type of sensationalism on CNN to that on Jones is simply silly. CNN does not invent conspiracies out of nothing. If anything, they are an administration puppet.

 

[babe]

If you nutcake InfoWar people want to listen to your scumbag echo chamber, create your own Facebook or twitter. And with that platform you can create your own set of rules and guidelines. It’s still a free country!

The first amendment is still applicable here. Facebook and twitter have a right to set their rules. If you violate their rules and become banned, that’s fine. You can create your own social media platform. The first amendment doesn’t give you immunity from consequences of violating Facebook’s and Twitter’s rules.

Go ahead @babe and @hack create your own twitterverse. If you nutcakes think your views are so popular, create your own platform and become a billionaire, like Zuckerberg. What better way to get back at that leftist commie millennial PC meanie head? Get off your lazy asses, stop bitching, put your superior race into action, and be the solution.

You can call your platform after something representative of you. Here are some ideas:“The Stormer”, “Nazi Book”, “Deplorables R Us”, “Butthurt Morons Jealous of AOC”, “Sexually Frustrated White Dudes Living in their Parent’s Basement”, “Desperate for Attention,” “Dreamin of a 3some with Pepe and Cassandra Fairbanks”, or “Twits.”

You’ll be rich in no time and you won’t have to be bothered with any leftist commies! Yay!

The Word On the Street now is Instagram, Facebook is in a nose dive.

Megaplatforms operate on legal terms of being platforms, not advocacy sites, and have a legal duty to not discriminate without legal basis. I think anyone who says they want to shoot or kill a President should be permanently banned from any public forum. Some things really shouldn't be tolerated.

But if a megapublic forum wants to rule out certain more or less common political views, or responsible but rare sorts of views, they need to advertise their advocacy limits and be ruled by PAC sorts of laws, where they are indeed liable if they tolerate illegal things.

 

[babe]

Gab is on the ropes. It's not even a function site right now.

It looks like there have been serious problems, more than just a bad press or user criticisms.

genuine publicly unacceptable stuff.

 

[One Brow]

Gab is on the ropes. It's not even a function site right now.

It looks like there have been serious problems, more than just a bad press or user criticisms.

genuine publicly unacceptable stuff.

That's what happens when you allow people to say almost anything. That's what you want, right? To turn Twitter into Gab?