CDZ Article about the Alex Jones censorship from Britain truth

[Skylar]

I can agree with this mostly. Seems to me that the liberals are terrified of what Jones has said and may say, and will do anything to silence conservatives voices. This being said, I do not watch Mr. Jones because I don't like the way he presets himself overall. In conclusion this is a sad attempt by the fascist left.

I said in another thread, unintended consequences have a way of rearing their ugly heads and biting you when you least expect it, and it is this that liberals are heading for. Chaos, failure, violence and destruction. I pray for the country.
***

ALEX JONES AND THE RISE OF CORPORATE CENSORSHIP

The banning of Infowars is an alarming act of capitalist intolerance.


So we’re now trusting the capitalist class, massive, unaccountable corporations, to decide on our behalf what we may listen to and talk about? This is the take-home message, the terrible take-home message, of the expulsion of Alex Jones’ Infowars network from Apple, Facebook and Spotify and of the wild whoops of delight that this summary banning generated among so-called liberals: that people are now okay with allowing global capitalism to govern the public sphere and to decree what is sayable and what is unsayable. Corporate censorship, liberals’ new favourite thing – how bizarre...

Continue to full article...

Alex Jones and the rise of corporate censorship

Censorship is a legal term denoting the government infringment on free speech. This isn't it. Jones has every right to say whatever he'd like. But he has to abide the terms of service he's agreed to if he wants to do it on someone else's website.

Jones himself has his own terms of service with similar limitations on those posting on his website. With threats to ban people who violate them....with Jones even insisting that such a ban from Infowars isn't censorship.

The hypocrisy is almost comic.

 

[ScorpioRising007]

I can agree with this mostly. Seems to me that the liberals are terrified of what Jones has said and may say, and will do anything to silence conservatives voices. This being said, I do not watch Mr. Jones because I don't like the way he presets himself overall. In conclusion this is a sad attempt by the fascist left.

I said in another thread, unintended consequences have a way of rearing their ugly heads and biting you when you least expect it, and it is this that liberals are heading for. Chaos, failure, violence and destruction. I pray for the country.
***

ALEX JONES AND THE RISE OF CORPORATE CENSORSHIP

The banning of Infowars is an alarming act of capitalist intolerance.


So we’re now trusting the capitalist class, massive, unaccountable corporations, to decide on our behalf what we may listen to and talk about? This is the take-home message, the terrible take-home message, of the expulsion of Alex Jones’ Infowars network from Apple, Facebook and Spotify and of the wild whoops of delight that this summary banning generated among so-called liberals: that people are now okay with allowing global capitalism to govern the public sphere and to decree what is sayable and what is unsayable. Corporate censorship, liberals’ new favourite thing – how bizarre...

Continue to full article...

Alex Jones and the rise of corporate censorship

Alex Jones isn't that the stupid idiot who claimed there was a government conspiracy at Bohemian Grove and human sacrifices to an Owl God were going on there?

 

[miketx]

I can agree with this mostly. Seems to me that the liberals are terrified of what Jones has said and may say, and will do anything to silence conservatives voices. This being said, I do not watch Mr. Jones because I don't like the way he presets himself overall. In conclusion this is a sad attempt by the fascist left.

I said in another thread, unintended consequences have a way of rearing their ugly heads and biting you when you least expect it, and it is this that liberals are heading for. Chaos, failure, violence and destruction. I pray for the country.
***

ALEX JONES AND THE RISE OF CORPORATE CENSORSHIP

The banning of Infowars is an alarming act of capitalist intolerance.


So we’re now trusting the capitalist class, massive, unaccountable corporations, to decide on our behalf what we may listen to and talk about? This is the take-home message, the terrible take-home message, of the expulsion of Alex Jones’ Infowars network from Apple, Facebook and Spotify and of the wild whoops of delight that this summary banning generated among so-called liberals: that people are now okay with allowing global capitalism to govern the public sphere and to decree what is sayable and what is unsayable. Corporate censorship, liberals’ new favourite thing – how bizarre...

Continue to full article...

Alex Jones and the rise of corporate censorship

Alex Jones isn't that the stupid idiot who claimed there was a government conspiracy at Bohemian Grove and human sacrifices to an Owl God were going on there?

Must have missed the part where I said I don't listen to his show...

 

[miketx]

I can agree with this mostly. Seems to me that the liberals are terrified of what Jones has said and may say, and will do anything to silence conservatives voices. This being said, I do not watch Mr. Jones because I don't like the way he presets himself overall. In conclusion this is a sad attempt by the fascist left.

I said in another thread, unintended consequences have a way of rearing their ugly heads and biting you when you least expect it, and it is this that liberals are heading for. Chaos, failure, violence and destruction. I pray for the country.
***

ALEX JONES AND THE RISE OF CORPORATE CENSORSHIP

The banning of Infowars is an alarming act of capitalist intolerance.


So we’re now trusting the capitalist class, massive, unaccountable corporations, to decide on our behalf what we may listen to and talk about? This is the take-home message, the terrible take-home message, of the expulsion of Alex Jones’ Infowars network from Apple, Facebook and Spotify and of the wild whoops of delight that this summary banning generated among so-called liberals: that people are now okay with allowing global capitalism to govern the public sphere and to decree what is sayable and what is unsayable. Corporate censorship, liberals’ new favourite thing – how bizarre...

Continue to full article...

Alex Jones and the rise of corporate censorship

Censorship is a legal term denoting the government infringment on free speech. This isn't it. Jones has every right to say whatever he'd like. But he has to abide the terms of service he's agreed to if he wants to do it on someone else's website.

Jones himself has his own terms of service with similar limitations on those posting on his website. With threats to ban people who violate them....with Jones even insisting that such a ban from Infowars isn't censorship.

The hypocrisy is almost comic.

It's giant corporations colluding to censor conservative voices, nothing else. Defend it all you like.

 

[Toronado3800]

No one has been silenced

You people can't seem to understand that a private entity cannot violate your first amendment rights and that the First only protects you from government overreach

No Private or corporate owned internet forum has to let you be a member

Anyone and I do mean anyone can go to GO Daddy get a domain and publish whatever they want on the web

I've repeatedly stated this is not a first amendment issue. It is giant corporations colluding to shut down conservative voices. That is exactly what it is! Dem scum are calling for more if it too.

I think if we tone down the Cheerleading / "us poor conservatives" "us vs them" talk we can make some progress.

For one, like I think I replied someplace else them hippies formerly had a tough time getting their information about the CIA and the effects of chemicals published. I remember that.

For two, I think the left / right bar is disgustingly simplistic and incorrect in this post 9-11 age. Most of us are trending towards some form of libertarianism anyways. We can argue about personal and economic rights.

Facebook brings up a problem.

Do you want to take away my right to publish what I want on my website?

If I own a bar do I have the right to regulate who comes in and performs?

If I own a bar can I control what people in the bar talk about?

How about my radio station? Can I keep Rush or some hippie off it and play a bunch of classic leftist rock songs?

What if I own the only bar or only radio station in town?

Facebook is real similar to some or all the above. Start Conservipedia if you don't like the other pedia. (I read both, you should join and read the behind the scenes arguments about what to include on Conservipedia)

I don't have a great answer.

 

[koshergrl]

No one has been silenced

You people can't seem to understand that a private entity cannot violate your first amendment rights and that the First only protects you from government overreach

No Private or corporate owned internet forum has to let you be a member

Anyone and I do mean anyone can go to GO Daddy get a domain and publish whatever they want on the web

I've repeatedly stated this is not a first amendment issue. It is giant corporations colluding to shut down conservative voices. That is exactly what it is! Dem scum are calling for more if it too.

A protected first amendment means that monopolies cannot do this.

And there is a monopoly on the social platforms. When there is no other reasonable way to communicate and it becomes a part of the fabric of society..and it's owned by a person or group of people who seek to tamp down the reach of people based on their ideology or their religion, then it's a first amendment violation.

It's a monopoly thing. Unlike the bakers who didn't have a monopoly on all baked goods, google, twitter, instagram, youtube and facebook do...when they work together to limit free speech, it's a big bad problem.

 

[Skull Pilot]

No one has been silenced

You people can't seem to understand that a private entity cannot violate your first amendment rights and that the First only protects you from government overreach

No Private or corporate owned internet forum has to let you be a member

Anyone and I do mean anyone can go to GO Daddy get a domain and publish whatever they want on the web

I've repeatedly stated this is not a first amendment issue. It is giant corporations colluding to shut down conservative voices. That is exactly what it is! Dem scum are calling for more if it too.

A protected first amendment means that monopolies cannot do this.

And there is a monopoly on the social platforms. When there is no other reasonable way to communicate and it becomes a part of the fabric of society..and it's owned by a person or group of people who seek to tamp down the reach of people based on their ideology or their religion, then it's a first amendment violation.

It's a monopoly thing. Unlike the bakers who didn't have a monopoly on all baked goods, google, twitter, instagram, youtube and facebook do...when they work together to limit free speech, it's a big bad problem.

The first amendment has absolutely nothing to do with the private sector.

There is no monopoly on the internet as anyone can acquire a domain name and build a website where they can say whatever they want. In fact Alex Jones has his own website.

You have to understand that you can say whatever you want but no one is obligated to provide you a venue,

 

[miketx]

No one has been silenced

You people can't seem to understand that a private entity cannot violate your first amendment rights and that the First only protects you from government overreach

No Private or corporate owned internet forum has to let you be a member

Anyone and I do mean anyone can go to GO Daddy get a domain and publish whatever they want on the web

I've repeatedly stated this is not a first amendment issue. It is giant corporations colluding to shut down conservative voices. That is exactly what it is! Dem scum are calling for more if it too.

A protected first amendment means that monopolies cannot do this.

And there is a monopoly on the social platforms. When there is no other reasonable way to communicate and it becomes a part of the fabric of society..and it's owned by a person or group of people who seek to tamp down the reach of people based on their ideology or their religion, then it's a first amendment violation.

It's a monopoly thing. Unlike the bakers who didn't have a monopoly on all baked goods, google, twitter, instagram, youtube and facebook do...when they work together to limit free speech, it's a big bad problem.

Yes, this is where the dimtards can find collusion!

 

[koshergrl]

No one has been silenced

You people can't seem to understand that a private entity cannot violate your first amendment rights and that the First only protects you from government overreach

No Private or corporate owned internet forum has to let you be a member

Anyone and I do mean anyone can go to GO Daddy get a domain and publish whatever they want on the web

I've repeatedly stated this is not a first amendment issue. It is giant corporations colluding to shut down conservative voices. That is exactly what it is! Dem scum are calling for more if it too.

A protected first amendment means that monopolies cannot do this.

And there is a monopoly on the social platforms. When there is no other reasonable way to communicate and it becomes a part of the fabric of society..and it's owned by a person or group of people who seek to tamp down the reach of people based on their ideology or their religion, then it's a first amendment violation.

It's a monopoly thing. Unlike the bakers who didn't have a monopoly on all baked goods, google, twitter, instagram, youtube and facebook do...when they work together to limit free speech, it's a big bad problem.

The first amendment has absolutely nothing to do with the private sector.

There is no monopoly on the internet as anyone can acquire a domain name and build a website where they can say whatever they want. In fact Alex Jones has his own website.

You have to understand that you can say whatever you want but no one is obligated to provide you a venue,

Yes there is a monopoly.

And if the only venue for free speech is owned by people who seek to restrict it...then yeah, it's a first amendment violation to restrict people based on their ideology and their religion.

Just like it's a free speech thing when paid goons take to the street to attack people for talking about stuff they don't want anybody to know about.

Glad I could clear that up for you.

 

[koshergrl]

No one has been silenced

You people can't seem to understand that a private entity cannot violate your first amendment rights and that the First only protects you from government overreach

No Private or corporate owned internet forum has to let you be a member

Anyone and I do mean anyone can go to GO Daddy get a domain and publish whatever they want on the web

I've repeatedly stated this is not a first amendment issue. It is giant corporations colluding to shut down conservative voices. That is exactly what it is! Dem scum are calling for more if it too.

A protected first amendment means that monopolies cannot do this.

And there is a monopoly on the social platforms. When there is no other reasonable way to communicate and it becomes a part of the fabric of society..and it's owned by a person or group of people who seek to tamp down the reach of people based on their ideology or their religion, then it's a first amendment violation.

It's a monopoly thing. Unlike the bakers who didn't have a monopoly on all baked goods, google, twitter, instagram, youtube and facebook do...when they work together to limit free speech, it's a big bad problem.

Yes, this is where the dimtards can find collusion!

They won't, because they are the ones colluding....

They magically don't see that collusion.

 

[koshergrl]

No one has been silenced

You people can't seem to understand that a private entity cannot violate your first amendment rights and that the First only protects you from government overreach

No Private or corporate owned internet forum has to let you be a member

Anyone and I do mean anyone can go to GO Daddy get a domain and publish whatever they want on the web

I've repeatedly stated this is not a first amendment issue. It is giant corporations colluding to shut down conservative voices. That is exactly what it is! Dem scum are calling for more if it too.

A protected first amendment means that monopolies cannot do this.

And there is a monopoly on the social platforms. When there is no other reasonable way to communicate and it becomes a part of the fabric of society..and it's owned by a person or group of people who seek to tamp down the reach of people based on their ideology or their religion, then it's a first amendment violation.

It's a monopoly thing. Unlike the bakers who didn't have a monopoly on all baked goods, google, twitter, instagram, youtube and facebook do...when they work together to limit free speech, it's a big bad problem.

The first amendment has absolutely nothing to do with the private sector.

There is no monopoly on the internet as anyone can acquire a domain name and build a website where they can say whatever they want. In fact Alex Jones has his own website.

You have to understand that you can say whatever you want but no one is obligated to provide you a venue,

They are if it's the only venue available, and everybody else uses it.

 

[koshergrl]

The leftists didn't understand the concept of rights when they were attacking the bakers, either.

It's simple. If by refusing service, you are not denying the people the ability to access cake at all, then you don't get to refuse service. Though honestly, I don't even think that's correct..because there is no *right to cake*.

There is a right to free speech, however.
And if by refusing service, and your best friends and peers refusing service, you freeze out a group of people from being able to speak in the accepted manner by which all other speakers speak..then that's a 1st amendment violation.

Don't worry, our conservative scotus will lay it all out when it gets to them.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I can agree with this mostly. Seems to me that the liberals are terrified of what Jones has said and may say, and will do anything to silence conservatives voices. This being said, I do not watch Mr. Jones because I don't like the way he presets himself overall. In conclusion this is a sad attempt by the fascist left.

I said in another thread, unintended consequences have a way of rearing their ugly heads and biting you when you least expect it, and it is this that liberals are heading for. Chaos, failure, violence and destruction. I pray for the country.
***

ALEX JONES AND THE RISE OF CORPORATE CENSORSHIP

The banning of Infowars is an alarming act of capitalist intolerance.


So we’re now trusting the capitalist class, massive, unaccountable corporations, to decide on our behalf what we may listen to and talk about? This is the take-home message, the terrible take-home message, of the expulsion of Alex Jones’ Infowars network from Apple, Facebook and Spotify and of the wild whoops of delight that this summary banning generated among so-called liberals: that people are now okay with allowing global capitalism to govern the public sphere and to decree what is sayable and what is unsayable. Corporate censorship, liberals’ new favourite thing – how bizarre...

Continue to full article...

Alex Jones and the rise of corporate censorship

Yeah, same old tired tactics of these people.

Nick Griffin, formerly of the BNP (British National Party) said that you had to pretend to be things you weren't.

Like Democratic, simply because you couldn't be attacked for these things.

Private companies can censor you as they wish. You come into MY HOME I don't have to put up with your crap.

You go onto Youtube, why should THEIR BUSINESS put up with HIS CRAP? Seriously, WHY?

 

[koshergrl]

I can agree with this mostly. Seems to me that the liberals are terrified of what Jones has said and may say, and will do anything to silence conservatives voices. This being said, I do not watch Mr. Jones because I don't like the way he presets himself overall. In conclusion this is a sad attempt by the fascist left.

I said in another thread, unintended consequences have a way of rearing their ugly heads and biting you when you least expect it, and it is this that liberals are heading for. Chaos, failure, violence and destruction. I pray for the country.
***

ALEX JONES AND THE RISE OF CORPORATE CENSORSHIP

The banning of Infowars is an alarming act of capitalist intolerance.


So we’re now trusting the capitalist class, massive, unaccountable corporations, to decide on our behalf what we may listen to and talk about? This is the take-home message, the terrible take-home message, of the expulsion of Alex Jones’ Infowars network from Apple, Facebook and Spotify and of the wild whoops of delight that this summary banning generated among so-called liberals: that people are now okay with allowing global capitalism to govern the public sphere and to decree what is sayable and what is unsayable. Corporate censorship, liberals’ new favourite thing – how bizarre...

Continue to full article...

Alex Jones and the rise of corporate censorship

Yeah, same old tired tactics of these people.

Nick Griffin, formerly of the BNP (British National Party) said that you had to pretend to be things you weren't.

Like Democratic, simply because you couldn't be attacked for these things.

Private companies can censor you as they wish. You come into MY HOME I don't have to put up with your crap.

You go onto Youtube, why should THEIR BUSINESS put up with HIS CRAP? Seriously, WHY?

Because it's the only way to reach the public. It's a monopoly, and as such, must be accessible to all.

Or we can break up up.

Same with google. They can keep censoring...and get broken up...or they can stop censoring and continue as they are.

And facebook. Zucks can censor...or the monopoly will get broken up.

Like AT&T back in the day.
"This divestiture was initiated by the filing in 1974 by the United States Department of Justice of an antitrust lawsuit against AT&T.[2] AT&T was, at the time, the sole provider of telephone service throughout most of the United States."
Breakup of the Bell System - Wikipedia

 

[Skull Pilot]

No one has been silenced

You people can't seem to understand that a private entity cannot violate your first amendment rights and that the First only protects you from government overreach

No Private or corporate owned internet forum has to let you be a member

Anyone and I do mean anyone can go to GO Daddy get a domain and publish whatever they want on the web

I've repeatedly stated this is not a first amendment issue. It is giant corporations colluding to shut down conservative voices. That is exactly what it is! Dem scum are calling for more if it too.

A protected first amendment means that monopolies cannot do this.

And there is a monopoly on the social platforms. When there is no other reasonable way to communicate and it becomes a part of the fabric of society..and it's owned by a person or group of people who seek to tamp down the reach of people based on their ideology or their religion, then it's a first amendment violation.

It's a monopoly thing. Unlike the bakers who didn't have a monopoly on all baked goods, google, twitter, instagram, youtube and facebook do...when they work together to limit free speech, it's a big bad problem.

The first amendment has absolutely nothing to do with the private sector.

There is no monopoly on the internet as anyone can acquire a domain name and build a website where they can say whatever they want. In fact Alex Jones has his own website.

You have to understand that you can say whatever you want but no one is obligated to provide you a venue,

Yes there is a monopoly.

And if the only venue for free speech is owned by people who seek to restrict it...then yeah, it's a first amendment violation to restrict people based on their ideology and their religion.

Just like it's a free speech thing when paid goons take to the street to attack people for talking about stuff they don't want anybody to know about.

Glad I could clear that up for you.

Facebook is NOT the only venue for free speech.

Anyone can create a website where they can say whatever the fuck they want

Alex Jones has his own website and he says whatever the fuck he wants and no one is stopping him. How is getting kicked off Facebook silencing him?

No one has the obligation to provide you with a venue to exercise your first amendment rights

And FYI it's only an issue if the GOVERNMENT restricts peoples' speech

Glad I could clear that up for you

 

[Skull Pilot]

I can agree with this mostly. Seems to me that the liberals are terrified of what Jones has said and may say, and will do anything to silence conservatives voices. This being said, I do not watch Mr. Jones because I don't like the way he presets himself overall. In conclusion this is a sad attempt by the fascist left.

I said in another thread, unintended consequences have a way of rearing their ugly heads and biting you when you least expect it, and it is this that liberals are heading for. Chaos, failure, violence and destruction. I pray for the country.
***

ALEX JONES AND THE RISE OF CORPORATE CENSORSHIP

The banning of Infowars is an alarming act of capitalist intolerance.


So we’re now trusting the capitalist class, massive, unaccountable corporations, to decide on our behalf what we may listen to and talk about? This is the take-home message, the terrible take-home message, of the expulsion of Alex Jones’ Infowars network from Apple, Facebook and Spotify and of the wild whoops of delight that this summary banning generated among so-called liberals: that people are now okay with allowing global capitalism to govern the public sphere and to decree what is sayable and what is unsayable. Corporate censorship, liberals’ new favourite thing – how bizarre...

Continue to full article...

Alex Jones and the rise of corporate censorship

Yeah, same old tired tactics of these people.

Nick Griffin, formerly of the BNP (British National Party) said that you had to pretend to be things you weren't.

Like Democratic, simply because you couldn't be attacked for these things.

Private companies can censor you as they wish. You come into MY HOME I don't have to put up with your crap.

You go onto Youtube, why should THEIR BUSINESS put up with HIS CRAP? Seriously, WHY?

Because it's the only way to reach the public. It's a monopoly, and as such, must be accessible to all.

Or we can break up up.

Same with google. They can keep censoring...and get broken up...or they can stop censoring and continue as they are.

And facebook. Zucks can censor...or the monopoly will get broken up.

Like AT&T back in the day.
"This divestiture was initiated by the filing in 1974 by the United States Department of Justice of an antitrust lawsuit against AT&T.[2] AT&T was, at the time, the sole provider of telephone service throughout most of the United States."
Breakup of the Bell System - Wikipedia

The internet is the only way to reach the public?

WTF are you smoking

No one is being banned from the internet. A website is a private forum and the people running it are not obligated to provide anyone a venue

 

[Skull Pilot]

No one has been silenced

You people can't seem to understand that a private entity cannot violate your first amendment rights and that the First only protects you from government overreach

No Private or corporate owned internet forum has to let you be a member

Anyone and I do mean anyone can go to GO Daddy get a domain and publish whatever they want on the web

I've repeatedly stated this is not a first amendment issue. It is giant corporations colluding to shut down conservative voices. That is exactly what it is! Dem scum are calling for more if it too.

A protected first amendment means that monopolies cannot do this.

And there is a monopoly on the social platforms. When there is no other reasonable way to communicate and it becomes a part of the fabric of society..and it's owned by a person or group of people who seek to tamp down the reach of people based on their ideology or their religion, then it's a first amendment violation.

It's a monopoly thing. Unlike the bakers who didn't have a monopoly on all baked goods, google, twitter, instagram, youtube and facebook do...when they work together to limit free speech, it's a big bad problem.

The first amendment has absolutely nothing to do with the private sector.

There is no monopoly on the internet as anyone can acquire a domain name and build a website where they can say whatever they want. In fact Alex Jones has his own website.

You have to understand that you can say whatever you want but no one is obligated to provide you a venue,

They are if it's the only venue available, and everybody else uses it.

FAcebook is not the only venue available

ANYONE can create their own venu

Get a domain name, post whatever the fuck you want

No one is stopping you

 

[Skull Pilot]

The First Amendment doesn't guarantee you the rights you think it does - CNNPolitics

This scenario illustrates one of the biggest misconceptions people have about the First Amendment. Bottom line: It protects you from the government punishing or censoring or oppressing your speech. It doesn't apply to private organizations. "So if, say, Twitter decides to ban you, you'd be a bit out of luck," Nott says. "You can't make a First Amendment claim in court."

 

[Toronado3800]

No one has been silenced

You people can't seem to understand that a private entity cannot violate your first amendment rights and that the First only protects you from government overreach

No Private or corporate owned internet forum has to let you be a member

Anyone and I do mean anyone can go to GO Daddy get a domain and publish whatever they want on the web

I've repeatedly stated this is not a first amendment issue. It is giant corporations colluding to shut down conservative voices. That is exactly what it is! Dem scum are calling for more if it too.

A protected first amendment means that monopolies cannot do this.

And there is a monopoly on the social platforms. When there is no other reasonable way to communicate and it becomes a part of the fabric of society..and it's owned by a person or group of people who seek to tamp down the reach of people based on their ideology or their religion, then it's a first amendment violation.

It's a monopoly thing. Unlike the bakers who didn't have a monopoly on all baked goods, google, twitter, instagram, youtube and facebook do...when they work together to limit free speech, it's a big bad problem.

Yes, this is where the dimtards can find collusion!

Taunting zone anyone?

 

[koshergrl]

The First Amendment doesn't guarantee you the rights you think it does - CNNPolitics

This scenario illustrates one of the biggest misconceptions people have about the First Amendment. Bottom line: It protects you from the government punishing or censoring or oppressing your speech. It doesn't apply to private organizations. "So if, say, Twitter decides to ban you, you'd be a bit out of luck," Nott says. "You can't make a First Amendment claim in court."

Private organizations cannot band together for the purpose of suppressing free speech.

Like I said, the scotus is going to rule on this. The little trinity that is Google/Youtube/facebook is going to go down.