Facebook Bans Milo Yiannopoulos, Alex Jones, Other Dangerous Figures

[mdk]

Not having a Facebook account is like not having running water in my household. Or something.

...Or electricity to power that sander of yours.

It’s powered by Hedonism.

 

[PixieStix]

Not having a Facebook account is like not having running water in my household. Or something.

Some of you are truly out of touch, if you actually think that facebook is not huge. Every business that is worth salt uses facebook to influence sales and to market it's products

 

[ThisIsMe]

Liberals love to ban. They have zero tolerance for non-libtard views.

Facebook is a private corporation and may do as they please or do you think the govt. should tell them what they should and should not be doing?

I agree, but do we need to harken back to a bakery in Colorado when the left was trying to argue fair access laws and talking about how a private business should be forced into serving anyone and everyone?

I agree with you here, it's a private business and can operate as they please, but, I hope we can be consistent in this stance.

 

[mdk]

Not having a Facebook account is like not having running water in my household. Or something.

Some of you are truly out of touch, if you actually think that facebook is not huge. Every business that is worth salt uses facebook to influence sales and to market it's products

Newspapers are also used for the same purpose. Should I have a right to a subscription? Not hardly.

 

[PixieStix]

It's too bad "liberals" don't believe in liberty. Unless someone openly, clearly advocates violence, they should get to speak. That's my version of "tolerance and inclusion." I despise Farrakhan, but I have never seen a quote attributed to him that advocates violence, and the few times I have read or listened to his speeches I have never seen him advocate violence. I would let the man speak on my platform/forum/whatever.

When you start banning speech because YOU consider it to be provocative, incendiary, inflammatory, hateful, etc., you're on a slippery slope to totalitarianism and oppression.

Facebook can't ban speech. They can't be totalitarian. They aren't a government.

If, on the other hand, government stepped in to tell Facebook what to publish - that would be a step toward totalitarianism. Maybe that's what you meant.

If they can't ban speech, why do they?
If they can't be totalitarian, why are they?
If they aren't fascist Germany? Why are they acting like it?

Why are all your arguments hyperbolic?

Because what fascistbook is doing is hyperbolic. They call those people they ban, "dangerous". Some on the right claim they have a right to defame someone because they are a private business. Who is hyperbolic?

You are. Private business is free to free to refuse its service to any individual it feels violates their terms. Your butthurt about it won't change this fact.

Can't wait till it happens to you, and it will. This is just the start. None of those people violated facebooks terms of service. They just disagreed with the left. I see pages that literally show children being harmed and people being killed. Guess what...they still have facebook pages, as does antifa. PJW, has never done anything like that, ever

 

[PixieStix]

Not having a Facebook account is like not having running water in my household. Or something.

Some of you are truly out of touch, if you actually think that facebook is not huge. Every business that is worth salt uses facebook to influence sales and to market it's products

Newspapers are also used for the same purpose. Should I have a right to a subscription? Not hardly.

If you pay for the subscription, yes. We pay by the ads that are allowed and also by the fact that facebook violates tons of privacy laws by selling our info

 

[beagle9]

The irony here would be funnier, if it werent so painfully idiotic.

Complain that a platform bans people and material it doesnt want on its platform. The call that censorship.

Then propose the platform be taken over and what it displays and does not display be completely determined by the government. But that's not censorship, and banning a few trolls is.

My brain needs a shower. This place is overflowing with morons.

Is that what people are asking for? I thought we were asking for equality and fairness. Isn't that what you guys are all about?

Not me. Equal rights under the law? Yes. Equality and fairness, enforced by government? No thanks. We can deal with that voluntarily. No reason to reach for guns.

Isn't equal rights under the law enforced by government already ? The whole thing in a nutshell is who is running government, and what laws are then created, governed, and implemented by said government.

It appears that the left has been far more into social engineering (when controlling government from a leftist administration level), than they were at governing for all American's in a more fair and balanced way when had the presidential power.

 

[PixieStix]

Liberals love to ban. They have zero tolerance for non-libtard views.

Facebook is a private corporation and may do as they please or do you think the govt. should tell them what they should and should not be doing?

I agree, but do we need to harken back to a bakery in Colorado when the left was trying to argue fair access laws and talking about how a private business should be forced into serving anyone and everyone?

I agree with you here, it's a private business and can operate as they please, but, I hope we can be consistent in this stance.

lol, Good luck getting consistency lol

 

[ThisIsMe]

Facebook announced Thursday that it has permanently banned a host of prominent figures it described as "dangerous" from its platform, including right-wing commentator and former Breitbart News editor Milo Yiannopoulos, conspiracy theorist Alex Jones and Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan.

The platform said it has determined that those figures are "dangerous," and removed them under their policy barring individuals and groups that promote hateful and violent messages.

The tech giant, which has been engaged in an escalating crackdown on hate speech and fear-mongering on its platforms, also removed neo-Nazi Paul Nehlen, who previously ran for the House in Wisconsin, far-right activist Laura Loomer and conservative YouTuber Paul Joseph Watson.


Facebook bans Milo Yiannopoulos, Alex Jones, other 'dangerous' figures

2019 will go down as the year where it tuned on Fox News, AM talk radio, and the fringe of social media.

It will go down as the year the Left it would be fashionable to decide that the Free Speech of American's should be curtailed.

The First Amendment doesn't apply to Facebook. You fucking wingers are dumb as dirt.

LOL, what a dumbass. So you support blocking all speech you don't like. The 1st amendment applies to all speech son, just because you want to hide behind a platform that is privately owned doesn't change the fact that someone's rights aren't being respected.

There is no right to free speech by private industry.

No? Yet you want to force a Christian Baker running a private business to bake a cake that violates HIS right to practice his religion. You're a bright one aren't you?

Damn, you beat me too it..I "must learn to read faster...!" (Mitch hedberg joke) [emoji16]

 

[beagle9]

Freedom for foreigners to cross national borders, collect welfare and vote in elections?

How about the freedom to own anti-aircraft cannons?

Or the freedom to have sex with children?

Law makes these things illegal for the good of the nation. that's why corporations need regulated, for the good of the nation.

Yeah, yeah. Cats and dogs living together! Mass hysteria! I'm tired of hearing about rednecks' incessant insecurity. If you really hate freedom so much, get arrested for a crime an go to jail. There, you get no freedom and the government takes care of you. You'll be in hog heaven.

Freedom without limitations. Do you really want that?

It's impossible.

 

[Moonglow]

Liberals love to ban. They have zero tolerance for non-libtard views.

Facebook is a private corporation and may do as they please or do you think the govt. should tell them what they should and should not be doing?

I agree, but do we need to harken back to a bakery in Colorado when the left was trying to argue fair access laws and talking about how a private business should be forced into serving anyone and everyone?

I agree with you here, it's a private business and can operate as they please, but, I hope we can be consistent in this stance.

This is not like a product one creates to sell this is an open platform supported by advertisers and the advertisers interest are taken into consideration long before the users...

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Some of you are truly out of touch, if you actually think that facebook is not huge.

The size of the business is irrelevant and a non sequitor.

Every business that is worth salt uses facebook to influence sales and to market it's products

I run 2 successful private businesses without using Facebook to market them. Your opinion isn't fact, sorry.

 

[beagle9]

Freedom for foreigners to cross national borders, collect welfare and vote in elections?

How about the freedom to own anti-aircraft cannons?

Or the freedom to have sex with children?

Law makes these things illegal for the good of the nation. that's why corporations need regulated, for the good of the nation.

Yeah, yeah. Cats and dogs living together! Mass hysteria! I'm tired of hearing about rednecks' incessant insecurity. If you really hate freedom so much, get arrested for a crime an go to jail. There, you won't have to put up with freedom at all. And the government will take care of you. You'll be in hog heaven.

And the Democrats will want his vote.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Facebook announced Thursday that it has permanently banned a host of prominent figures it described as "dangerous" from its platform, including right-wing commentator and former Breitbart News editor Milo Yiannopoulos, conspiracy theorist Alex Jones and Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan.

The platform said it has determined that those figures are "dangerous," and removed them under their policy barring individuals and groups that promote hateful and violent messages.

The tech giant, which has been engaged in an escalating crackdown on hate speech and fear-mongering on its platforms, also removed neo-Nazi Paul Nehlen, who previously ran for the House in Wisconsin, far-right activist Laura Loomer and conservative YouTuber Paul Joseph Watson.


Facebook bans Milo Yiannopoulos, Alex Jones, other 'dangerous' figures

2019 will go down as the year where it tuned on Fox News, AM talk radio, and the fringe of social media.

Censorship is dangerous.

I know I have never seen any dirty words in the Bible..

Once you start censoring speech that you personally consider "dangerous" everything that is not censored has the taint of bias on it. If you believe in democracy, you must oppose censorship of free speech no matter how well intentioned you are. Of course, in this case we are talking about a money making business, so it is more likely facebook is censoring speech because they believe it will bring in more money.

I have to agree with moon here. In a private establishment, you follow their rules, in this case, the establishment is an online presence. We have to be consistent. The right talked about the bakery and said they have the right to serve as they please. Facebook is no different.

Best we can do, if we dont like the rules is to make your own Facebook, then you can set the rules.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Liberals love to ban. They have zero tolerance for non-libtard views.

Facebook is a private corporation and may do as they please or do you think the govt. should tell them what they should and should not be doing?

I agree, but do we need to harken back to a bakery in Colorado when the left was trying to argue fair access laws and talking about how a private business should be forced into serving anyone and everyone?

I agree with you here, it's a private business and can operate as they please, but, I hope we can be consistent in this stance.

This is not like a product one creates to sell this is an open platform supported by advertisers and the advertisers interest are taken into consideration long before the users...

Ok, but overall it's a private business. To be consistent, we must agree that all private business should abide by the same rules, correct? So, a Baker, or an online social media presence should be equally have the ability to make their own rules and operate as they see fit. Do you agree?

Doesnt matter if one company makes a product for sale, or makes a program for free consumption. The overall key here is "private business".

 

[toomuchtime_]

Facebook announced Thursday that it has permanently banned a host of prominent figures it described as "dangerous" from its platform, including right-wing commentator and former Breitbart News editor Milo Yiannopoulos, conspiracy theorist Alex Jones and Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan.

The platform said it has determined that those figures are "dangerous," and removed them under their policy barring individuals and groups that promote hateful and violent messages.

The tech giant, which has been engaged in an escalating crackdown on hate speech and fear-mongering on its platforms, also removed neo-Nazi Paul Nehlen, who previously ran for the House in Wisconsin, far-right activist Laura Loomer and conservative YouTuber Paul Joseph Watson.


Facebook bans Milo Yiannopoulos, Alex Jones, other 'dangerous' figures

2019 will go down as the year where it tuned on Fox News, AM talk radio, and the fringe of social media.

Censorship is dangerous.

I know I have never seen any dirty words in the Bible..

Once you start censoring speech that you personally consider "dangerous" everything that is not censored has the taint of bias on it. If you believe in democracy, you must oppose censorship of free speech no matter how well intentioned you are. Of course, in this case we are talking about a money making business, so it is more likely facebook is censoring speech because they believe it will bring in more money.

I have to agree with moon here. In a private establishment, you follow their rules, in this case, the establishment is an online presence. We have to be consistent. The right talked about the bakery and said they have the right to serve as they please. Facebook is no different.

Best we can do, if we dont like the rules is to make your own Facebook, then you can set the rules.

Of course, facebook has the right to censor any speech it doesn't like, but just as the owners of the bakery are now seen by many as bigots and their patrons are suspected of bigotry for patronizing the bakery by many, once facebook starts to censor speech it doesn't like, that speech it allows is now tainted by the presumption of bias on the part of facebook. Can you now get a full picture of the for and against arguments from reading facebook, or only one side of the argument?

 

[Moonglow]

Liberals love to ban. They have zero tolerance for non-libtard views.

Facebook is a private corporation and may do as they please or do you think the govt. should tell them what they should and should not be doing?

I agree, but do we need to harken back to a bakery in Colorado when the left was trying to argue fair access laws and talking about how a private business should be forced into serving anyone and everyone?

I agree with you here, it's a private business and can operate as they please, but, I hope we can be consistent in this stance.

This is not like a product one creates to sell this is an open platform supported by advertisers and the advertisers interest are taken into consideration long before the users...

Ok, but overall it's a private business. To be consistent, we must agree that all private business should abide by the same rules, correct? So, a Baker, or an online social media presence should be equally have the ability to make their own rules and operate as they see fit. Do you agree?

Doesnt matter if one company makes a product for sale, or makes a program for free consumption. The overall key here is "private business".

As long as the customer reads the fine print and understands that.

 

[Moonglow]

Facebook announced Thursday that it has permanently banned a host of prominent figures it described as "dangerous" from its platform, including right-wing commentator and former Breitbart News editor Milo Yiannopoulos, conspiracy theorist Alex Jones and Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan.

The platform said it has determined that those figures are "dangerous," and removed them under their policy barring individuals and groups that promote hateful and violent messages.

The tech giant, which has been engaged in an escalating crackdown on hate speech and fear-mongering on its platforms, also removed neo-Nazi Paul Nehlen, who previously ran for the House in Wisconsin, far-right activist Laura Loomer and conservative YouTuber Paul Joseph Watson.


Facebook bans Milo Yiannopoulos, Alex Jones, other 'dangerous' figures

2019 will go down as the year where it tuned on Fox News, AM talk radio, and the fringe of social media.

Censorship is dangerous.

I know I have never seen any dirty words in the Bible..

Once you start censoring speech that you personally consider "dangerous" everything that is not censored has the taint of bias on it. If you believe in democracy, you must oppose censorship of free speech no matter how well intentioned you are. Of course, in this case we are talking about a money making business, so it is more likely facebook is censoring speech because they believe it will bring in more money.

I have to agree with moon here. In a private establishment, you follow their rules, in this case, the establishment is an online presence. We have to be consistent. The right talked about the bakery and said they have the right to serve as they please. Facebook is no different.

Best we can do, if we dont like the rules is to make your own Facebook, then you can set the rules.

Of course, facebook has the right to censor any speech it doesn't like, but just as the owners of the bakery are now seen by many as bigots and their patrons are suspected of bigotry for patronizing the bakery by many, once facebook starts to censor speech it doesn't like, that speech it allows is now tainted by the presumption of bias on the part of facebook. Can you now get a full picture of the for and against arguments from reading facebook, or only one side of the argument?

A users license agreement is not the same as walking into a bakery....Normally walking into a bakery doesn't require you to select yes or no with the agreement to use the place of business or the product of a business like a website/program does.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Censorship is dangerous.

I know I have never seen any dirty words in the Bible..

Once you start censoring speech that you personally consider "dangerous" everything that is not censored has the taint of bias on it. If you believe in democracy, you must oppose censorship of free speech no matter how well intentioned you are. Of course, in this case we are talking about a money making business, so it is more likely facebook is censoring speech because they believe it will bring in more money.

I have to agree with moon here. In a private establishment, you follow their rules, in this case, the establishment is an online presence. We have to be consistent. The right talked about the bakery and said they have the right to serve as they please. Facebook is no different.

Best we can do, if we dont like the rules is to make your own Facebook, then you can set the rules.

Of course, facebook has the right to censor any speech it doesn't like, but just as the owners of the bakery are now seen by many as bigots and their patrons are suspected of bigotry for patronizing the bakery by many, once facebook starts to censor speech it doesn't like, that speech it allows is now tainted by the presumption of bias on the part of facebook. Can you now get a full picture of the for and against arguments from reading facebook, or only one side of the argument?

A users license agreement is not the same as walking into a bakery....Normally walking into a bakery doesn't require you to select yes or no with the agreement to use the place of business or the product of a business like a website/program does.

If facebook can decide on which people to serve on the basis of speech or behviors why can't a baker?

 

[Moonglow]

I know I have never seen any dirty words in the Bible..

Once you start censoring speech that you personally consider "dangerous" everything that is not censored has the taint of bias on it. If you believe in democracy, you must oppose censorship of free speech no matter how well intentioned you are. Of course, in this case we are talking about a money making business, so it is more likely facebook is censoring speech because they believe it will bring in more money.

I have to agree with moon here. In a private establishment, you follow their rules, in this case, the establishment is an online presence. We have to be consistent. The right talked about the bakery and said they have the right to serve as they please. Facebook is no different.

Best we can do, if we dont like the rules is to make your own Facebook, then you can set the rules.

Of course, facebook has the right to censor any speech it doesn't like, but just as the owners of the bakery are now seen by many as bigots and their patrons are suspected of bigotry for patronizing the bakery by many, once facebook starts to censor speech it doesn't like, that speech it allows is now tainted by the presumption of bias on the part of facebook. Can you now get a full picture of the for and against arguments from reading facebook, or only one side of the argument?

A users license agreement is not the same as walking into a bakery....Normally walking into a bakery doesn't require you to select yes or no with the agreement to use the place of business or the product of a business like a website/program does.

If facebook can decide on which people to serve on the basis of speech or behviors why can't a baker?

Can the baker get the customer to agree to this before the asking the baker?