Jump to content


Censorship


Recommended Posts


1 hour ago, Archy1221 said:

While I agree with the general sentiment, there's a world of difference between the head of the executive branch of the federal government saying how people should talk to him and the Missouri State Fair setting what they consider as appropriate behavior by someone they are hiring.

Link to comment

On 12/7/2020 at 2:18 PM, RedDenver said:

 

All the government needs to do is make sure the tech companies act consistently with their words.  If Google wants to say "we're the NYT and only publish what we want" then they will be free to do so.  But they cannot claim to be a content neutral technology company while actively censoring the content. 

 

They just announced today to censor all of the videos claiming Trump won the election.  the counter-examples saying the the same thing for Hilary and Stacey Abrams will be presumably left alone.  Sunny P's statements to Congress should be scrutinized.  And if he said anything that said Youtube would no censor conservatives that is 1 count of lying to Congress and grounds for his perp walk. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

All the government needs to do is make sure the tech companies act consistently with their words.  If Google wants to say "we're the NYT and only publish what we want" then they will be free to do so.  But they cannot claim to be a content neutral technology company while actively censoring the content. 

 

They just announced today to censor all of the videos claiming Trump won the election.  the counter-examples saying the the same thing for Hilary and Stacey Abrams will be presumably left alone.  Sunny P's statements to Congress should be scrutinized.  And if he said anything that said Youtube would no censor conservatives that is 1 count of lying to Congress and grounds for his perp walk. 

Being inconsistent with words is not an exception to the 1st Amendment, nor is having editing power over their own website. And they can absolutely claim to be neutral while censoring content - those are not mutually exclusive even if you disagree with them.

 

Additionally, censoring videos perceived to be making false or incendiary statements is not at all the same as censoring conservatives.

 

I don't like the power these tech companies have over the public discourse right now, but giving the government censorship power is the exact opposite of a solution.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
21 hours ago, RedDenver said:

 

Additionally, censoring videos perceived to be making false or incendiary statements is not at all the same as censoring conservatives.

 

It's exactly the same.  You can make any false or incendiary statement that supports the liberal side and it won't be censored but possibly promoted. 

 

In the 22 hours since yesterday's post we learned that the "false" information about Hunter Biden, aggressively suppressed by Google and FB, was believed by federal prosecutors in an investigation.  That was pure fraud from Big Tech and they are the enemies of freedom.

  • Plus1 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
22 hours ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

 

It's exactly the same.  You can make any false or incendiary statement that supports the liberal side and it won't be censored but possibly promoted. 

This is nonsense. Just because you want to believe this doesn't make it true.

Quote

In the 22 hours since yesterday's post we learned that the "false" information about Hunter Biden, aggressively suppressed by Google and FB, was believed by federal prosecutors in an investigation.  That was pure fraud from Big Tech and they are the enemies of freedom.

No we haven't. We've only learned there is an investigation, not was and wasn't believed to be true or false.

 

And you continue to ignore the issue of the rights of the companies to determine what should and shouldn't be on their system. If you don't like what they're doing, then use another system or create your own.

  • Plus1 3
Link to comment
22 hours ago, RedDenver said:

Additionally, censoring videos perceived to be making false or incendiary statements is not at all the same as censoring conservatives.

 

1 hour ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

It's exactly the same. 

 

It's only the same to you because your brand of conservatism lives and thrives on false and incendiary statements. 

  • Plus1 4
Link to comment

8 minutes ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

IT took me 30 seconds to find 9/11 truther conspiracy videos on youtube, many of them are quite old.  Google is oppressing their political opponents pure and simple.  

 

Those are quite literally nonsensical conspiracy nutters. They carry zero weight.

 

But if they gained even a modicum of momentum in seditious belief or intent, they'd be yanked.

 

It took me less than 30 seconds to find anti-Obama videos on YouTube. It took even less time to find anti-Biden videos and videos pushing the Hunter Biden Burisma conspiracy theories.

 

Conservatives aren't the victims of big tech. They're trying to bully big tech into bowing to their will, just like they've done to the press.

 

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...