Free Speech
- Thread starter A2K78
- 1,028 comments
- 63,450 views
- 84,441
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
Dotini
(Banned)
- 15,742
- Seattle
- CR80_Shifty
I considered putting it in the political correctness thread. Do you think the questions raised in the article actually merits a new thread?
- 28,471
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
I'm not sure how one determines how popular a movement is on social media, YT etc. Given their political bent I don't think you'll get the information from YT. I find it fascinating that it would become a movement at all assuming it's a real thing. It doesn't take much of a swing to change the face of American politics. The Republicans control many of the political offices in the land that matters other than a smattering of coastal states and a handful of cities. A small shift to the right or even the centre among Democrats could spell doom for their party, if it isn't doomed already. Also fascinating that this movement seems to be fueled by largly conservative or centrist speakers and speech makers on YT and other social media, whose focus is on such exciting topics as U.S. history, free speech, equality of opportunity, the Constitution etc.
What's fascinating about that? They are just perpetuating a narrative (regardless of how true or accurate it is) that benefits their cause...
- 28,471
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
But, that isn't really what is happening here?
It seems like, a person 'switched sides' for want of a better term, it gained traction and then was pushed by spam bots and Trump supporters. There seems to be very little evidence that it's even a real thing.
How does that, become a;
Though, thinking about it, I think that sentence is so vague you could probably apply it to viral Love Island memes
- 28,471
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
I'm not talking about the walkaway movement. I'm speaking more generally, about the walkaway movement, the conservative movement, the Intellectual Dark Web I just learned about, all of it. The content is essentially boring and dry, there's little that's titillating and exciting about it. And yet hundreds of thousands or millions of people are clicking that mouse button or pressing the screen. Dennis Prager the conservative talk radio host put out a 5 minute video last week on the life of Ulysses S. Grant and it garnered 1.3 million views in a little over a week. Ulysses S. Grant
. He put out a video on Walt Disney two months ago that has the same number of views. I find that utterly fascinating.That's quite a bit, it seems like the walkaway movement, isn't actually a movement at all but pro-Trump propaganda. The conservative movement? And then the self titled Intellectual Dark Web, that isn't on the dark web at all.
Dennis Prager is (apparently) a nation talk radio show host, it therefore seems unsurprising that he can garner over a million views on topics that I imagine (given the that you pointed out he was a conservative) have a political agenda.
What's so interesting? Sorry if I'm banging on a bit, I'm just confused as it seems like there isn't anything to any of these things, other than it all appears to come largely from the right.
- 28,471
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
- 28,471
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
To be fair, that was a joke.
But I do read everything you type, even if I only quote a section.
The reason I asked you to clarify was because it seems the only reason you find these subjects/topics interesting, is because of your right leaning political views (which is fine).
I didn't/don't want someone to come across these things, see someone say how interesting they are and have that, give them merit or credibility (outside of it just being more right-wing silliness).
Hope that helps
- 28,471
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
Someone has to look after the weakminded and gullible I suppose. Keep up the good work:tup:To be fair, that was a joke.
But I do read everything you type, even if I only quote a section.
The reason I asked you to clarify was because it seems the only reason you find these subjects/topics interesting, is because of your right leaning political views (which is fine).
I didn't/don't want someone to come across these things, see someone say how interesting they are and have that, give them merit or credibility (outside of it just being more right-wing silliness).
Hope that helps
- 6,425
- KCCO
- 24,608
- Anoka, MN
Actually he is as the government has no say in what private companies choose to censor or promote.
Plus he apparently doesn’t know the meaning of “monopoly”.
- 6,425
- KCCO
“In the sense that these companies are indeed censoring and promoting certain targeted individuals.”
Christ, does everything need to be spelled out...
- 28,798
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
Apparently.
From the very first word, the First Amendment is clear in that it's about what's [not] permissible of government and not of private entities...you know...like businesses.First Amendment
- 6,425
- KCCO
That's not what the point of their argument is however. There is a very clear understanding that there are individuals/groups/organizations that are being targeted and silenced on these platforms of which are not violating TOS. IE: YouTube censoring select channels/content creators and hiding their content/making it nearly impossible to find. Facebook is not alone on this front either. And it's one thing that these companies are doing such things, it's another when their heads of leadership actively state that they are not when there is verifiable evidence.
Joey D
Premium
- 46,710
- Boyne Falls, MI
- GTP_Joey
- GTP Joey
It might not be the point of his argument, but his argument is based on a misconception of the First Amendment. The First Amendment only protects you from the government trying to censor you. It's perfectly legal for a private (or public company for that matter) to censor its customers/users. It might not be ethical or good business practice, but an entity like Facebook isn't breaking any laws by saying who can/cannot use their site. Even if Zuckerberg came out and said, "no one named Tim is allowed to use Facebook" it's all perfectly legal.
I agree certain organizations and individuals are being targeted, but seriously, how lame do you have to be to bitch about being censored on social media? Just find a new platform, or if you're really passionate about it, create your own. Hell, anyone can create their own website where they can deliver their message as they see fit.
- 16,488
- Grea'er Laandan
- UKMikeyA
- UKMikeyA
Notice how Pukita complains about his loss of followers even as he accuses anyone who criticises him who doesn't have hundreds of followers themselves of being a "#demtrollbot". His priorities are clear. It's as if he were blowing his own Trump pet.
Last edited:
- 28,798
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
"Things to consider when deciding whether or not to utilize services that a private entity provides."
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
So what, why do Facebook have to be honest? And if you think they're not honest then don't trust them with personal things, or make a balanced judgement about how much you trust them with. We go round and round this. For example, if you post something here that @Jordan, @Famine or the mods don't want published on the site in the name of GTPlanet then they remove or edit it. That's their right - and there is zero responsibility on their part to be transparent about it or to give any notice.
- 13,738
- Adelaide
- Neomone
These companies can do whatever they like. The TOS is a courtesy to let you know what to expect. There is nothing stopping them from randomly banning you and deleting your content tomorrow, with no explanation or warning at all. That's distressing if you're one of the people who essentially make their livelihood from operating on such platforms, but it's as it should be.
- 6,425
- KCCO
The specific issue mentioned by those affected however is that they are not being fairly treated compared to others who share differing opinions of the same subject. It's obvious to see that if they were doing something against some sort of policy, that they should deserve some sort of reprimands for it, but what is happening is they are being silenced through hidden coding, known by that of their leadership, and leadership openly admitting they know nothing of. It's shady work.
Completely agree. After working with some eastern European and Russian business myself, I've seen what could happen to individuals/groups. I don't think anyone should be immune but fairness should be considered when there are multiple parties within the same discussion.
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
Oh, that's tragic. Why do Facebook have to treat anybody according to that person's idea of "fair"? Or anybody's idea of "fair"? Do I have to? Do you have to?
- 6,425
- KCCO
I mean, if double standards are you're thing, then I would say you're welcome to endorse them?
