How are we going to stop the liberal war on free speech and conservative voices?

[Syriusly]

Grampa Murked U, this is not a Freedom of Speech issue, it's a cultural/socio-political issue.

The Regressive Left is going to do everything it can to control what is heard, seen and read. And because it has near total control of social media, popular culture and education, and because it has a lion's share of the media, they get what they want.

Nothing they're doing is illegal or unconstitutional, per se, although it clearly flies in the face of the spirit of the First Amendment. But remember, those same people say the Constitution was written by rich white slave rapists anyway, so who cares.

I don't see anything that will change this. They're going for it now.
.

Right, they were banned for being Pro-Trump. Communists/Democrats despise our Constitution. They want it scrapped. This Facebook move is very predictable. The guy who runs it, is a huge Democrat donor. He's been systematically banning Trump supporters since the Election. He's a real POS.

At least like most conservatives you’re consistent at being ignorant and stupid.

Facebook is a private company, not a government entity, and at liberty to edit content as it sees fit, having nothing to do with the Constitution or ‘free speech.’

And how Factbook might edit its content endangers neither the Constitution nor free speech.

/——/ Yet libs want Rush and Fox News off the air.

Yet contards want CNN and ABC and well- everyone but Fox News and Rush Limbaugh and his fellow travellers off the air.

I've never called for that. I know CNN and ABC are Democrat Fake News, but i'm not calling for them to be forced off the air. However, Communists/Democrats frequently call for Limbaugh and Fox News to be censored, or outright banned..

I've never called for Limbaugh or Fox News to be censored or outright banned- even though we all know that they are the biggest manufacturers of Fake News after Donald Trump. However Fascists/Republicans frequently call for CNN and ABC to be censored or outright banned. Hell Donald Trump has even called for the Washington Post to have to register with the government.

 

[Syriusly]

Zuckerberg's a Democrat asshole. Dump Facebook. Nuff said.

Well that is how Capitalism works- if people don't like the product- or even the leadership of the company- you can shop somewhere else.

Or you can start snowflake threads about 'censorship'

 

[Syriusly]

Look at it this way: he's intimidated North Korea, China and now Russia. You really think pussyhat Progressives are going to beat him?

LOL you probably actually believe that bullshit.

 

[Syriusly]

Grampa Murked U, this is not a Freedom of Speech issue, it's a cultural/socio-political issue.

The Regressive Left is going to do everything it can to control what is heard, seen and read. And because it has near total control of social media, popular culture and education, and because it has a lion's share of the media, they get what they want.

Nothing they're doing is illegal or unconstitutional, per se, although it clearly flies in the face of the spirit of the First Amendment. But remember, those same people say the Constitution was written by rich white slave rapists anyway, so who cares.

I don't see anything that will change this. They're going for it now.
.

Right, they were banned for being Pro-Trump. Communists/Democrats despise our Constitution. They want it scrapped. This Facebook move is very predictable. The guy who runs it, is a huge Democrat donor. He's been systematically banning Trump supporters since the Election. He's a real POS.

At least like most conservatives you’re consistent at being ignorant and stupid.

Facebook is a private company, not a government entity, and at liberty to edit content as it sees fit, having nothing to do with the Constitution or ‘free speech.’

And how Factbook might edit its content endangers neither the Constitution nor free speech.

/——/ Yet libs want Rush and Fox News off the air.

Yet contards want CNN and ABC and well- everyone but Fox News and Rush Limbaugh and his fellow travellers off the air.

This latest Facebook move represents dirty Democrat Authoritarianism perfectly. Those two women are big Trump supporters, and Zuckerberg is a shameful bigtime Democrat Donor. Folks should dump Facebook. Period, end of story.

Because of course the Republican Authoritarianism is so different.

Because Rush Limbaugh welcomes dissenting voices on his show. Because Infowars welcomes comments by those who oppose their right wing echo chamber. Because WND is a bastion of fair and balanced comments.

 

[TheDude]

Youtube isn't a government program. They are free to allow or disallow what ever they want. Today's version of Amos and Andy are free to post anything they want, and spout whatever they want to spout. Youtube just doesn't care to help them promote it.

BULLSHIT. On one hand restaurants are expected to serve everyone regardless of sex-preference, skin color, age yadda yadda. Yet Youtube, a KEY player in providing information to the public, should be free to weed out anyone and anything they see fit?

 

[BULLDOG]

Youtube isn't a government program. They are free to allow or disallow what ever they want. Today's version of Amos and Andy are free to post anything they want, and spout whatever they want to spout. Youtube just doesn't care to help them promote it.

BULLSHIT. On one hand restaurants are expected to serve everyone regardless of sex-preference, skin color, age yadda yadda. Yet Youtube, who has is a KEY player in providing information to the public should be free to weed out anyone and anything they see fit?

tissue?

 

[OldLady]

From colleges to YouTube and now Diamond & Silk on Facebook.
Facebook to Diamond and Silk: Your content, brand ‘dangerous to the community’

Two conservative black women being targeted as a "danger to the community"

Seriously? Gtfo with this stupidity. They only thing they are a danger to is your oppression of conservative voices.

This shit has to be put to bed. Further segmenting our society & suppressing their voice is not the way you win a political debate.
Challenge them, argue with them, present them with an opposing view but to just outright silence them?

Just proves to me that the left are increasingly alarmed that their grasp on the media & their ability to force the conversation in a certain direction are under threat. They are clearly scared to death of free speech.

As usual, there's a lot of bitching and moaning in that article but no examples of what the offending statements were. Those are NEVER included, are they?
I am not going to their new and improved pages, because I wouldn't trust going to the site of someone who is sending content that is dangerous.

 

[TheDude]

Youtube isn't a government program. They are free to allow or disallow what ever they want. Today's version of Amos and Andy are free to post anything they want, and spout whatever they want to spout. Youtube just doesn't care to help them promote it.

BULLSHIT. On one hand restaurants are expected to serve everyone regardless of sex-preference, skin color, age yadda yadda. Yet Youtube, who has is a KEY player in providing information to the public should be free to weed out anyone and anything they see fit?

tissue?

I believe that's code you're lacking the intellect to defend your position.

 

[OldLady]

Zuckerberg's a Democrat asshole. Dump Facebook. Nuff said.

Well that is how Capitalism works- if people don't like the product- or even the leadership of the company- you can shop somewhere else.

Or you can start snowflake threads about 'censorship'

TN showed me a couple of examples yesterday of the FB/Google world shutting down conservative content (not Alt Right stuff). If they want to be a liberal haven, that is their choice, but they are such a huge platform, it might be good if they tried to be more evenhanded--like USMB.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I disagree. I think it's time to introduce them to the joys of the free market, and start looking for the Next Big Thing to replace them. If it's not out there today, it will be tomorrow.

The thing is platforms like facebook seem to favor the ONE BIG THING, to increase interconnectivity.

Better to just declare them a commons/utility and regulate them.

I pretty much never default to "the government should take over".

That is almost always the right answer.

Off the top of my head, I can't recall any time when the answer to "How do we make this better?" was "We have the government do it."

The Interstate Highway system!

What were the other options presented?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The thing is platforms like facebook seem to favor the ONE BIG THING, to increase interconnectivity.

Better to just declare them a commons/utility and regulate them.

I pretty much never default to "the government should take over".

That is almost always the right answer.

Off the top of my head, I can't recall any time when the answer to "How do we make this better?" was "We have the government do it."

The Interstate Highway system!

What were the other options presented?

continuing to rely on the current highway system of the time.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Just a reminder of what this thread is about...

From colleges to YouTube and now Diamond & Silk on Facebook.
Facebook to Diamond and Silk: Your content, brand ‘dangerous to the community’

Two conservative black women being targeted as a "danger to the community"

Seriously? Gtfo with this stupidity. They only thing they are a danger to is your oppression of conservative voices.

This shit has to be put to bed. Further segmenting our society & suppressing their voice is not the way you win a political debate.
Challenge them, argue with them, present them with an opposing view but to just outright silence them?

Just proves to me that the left are increasingly alarmed that their grasp on the media & their ability to force the conversation in a certain direction are under threat. They are clearly scared to death of free speech.

Not Rush, not Fox, not even the first amendment.

This thread is about the complete and utter disregard the left has for half of our nation and it is asking what we do about it.
I understand that most of the left can't take the op to task on the merits of the first post so we've diverted to Rush & the like. If you want to discuss those other things you keep bringing up feel free to create your own thread on that topic.

Yeah, but I'm not sure the government is the answer to private companies going political.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Refusing to accommodate someone else's speech is in no way "silencing" them. It's just not lending them your megaphone.

Media Matters tirelessly works to prohibit conservative speakers from being able to speak. That's just one significant example right there.

Media Matters has its own enforcers? Like the police or something? I had no idea.

Media Matters threatens organizations with boycotts, etc. for allowing conservatives to speak. Yea, the left supports freedom of expression.

Conservatives threaten actual people for speaking- like this conservative broadcaster

That tweet cost him both his radio show and his TV show.

 

[rightwinger]

Who ever said speech was free?

You always pay a price

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Who ever said speech was free?

You always pay a price

Yep

 

[Cecilie1200]

It's an inability that most of our population suffers from.

I'm fine with calling them out for being closed-minded, and quite illiberal. But I think it's dangerous to conflate PC censorship, done by private citizens and business, as a violation of free speech. And not just as a technical legal matter. A media outlet making decisions about what it will, and won't, publish IS free speech. It's just free speech you disagree with.

That said, the anger of the culture wars is fueling fascist yearnings on both sides. It's a real danger.

The problem is places like facebook and youtube and twitter, aren't the media in the traditional sense, they are more of a form of an electronic commons that takes the place of the old village square.

I know it goes against my libertarian leanings, but I almost think it's time to treat these places AS public commons, and thus obligated to protect the Rights of people using them, just as government would protect the village square.

I disagree. I think it's time to introduce them to the joys of the free market, and start looking for the Next Big Thing to replace them. If it's not out there today, it will be tomorrow.

The thing is platforms like facebook seem to favor the ONE BIG THING, to increase interconnectivity.

Better to just declare them a commons/utility and regulate them.

Ah.....have the government take them over, eh? Federalize them.

No takeover needed. They can still be a for profit company. They just have 1st amendment requirements extended to them (requirements, not rights) as part of a new digital commons.

And the legal precedent for that would be . . . ?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Just a reminder of what this thread is about...

From colleges to YouTube and now Diamond & Silk on Facebook.
Facebook to Diamond and Silk: Your content, brand ‘dangerous to the community’

Two conservative black women being targeted as a "danger to the community"

Seriously? Gtfo with this stupidity. They only thing they are a danger to is your oppression of conservative voices.

This shit has to be put to bed. Further segmenting our society & suppressing their voice is not the way you win a political debate.
Challenge them, argue with them, present them with an opposing view but to just outright silence them?

Just proves to me that the left are increasingly alarmed that their grasp on the media & their ability to force the conversation in a certain direction are under threat. They are clearly scared to death of free speech.

Not Rush, not Fox, not even the first amendment.

This thread is about the complete and utter disregard the left has for half of our nation and it is asking what we do about it.
I understand that most of the left can't take the op to task on the merits of the first post so we've diverted to Rush & the like. If you want to discuss those other things you keep bringing up feel free to create your own thread on that topic.

Yeah, but I'm not sure the government is the answer to private companies going political.

Of course it is not, as the government would only go after the ones that did not support the current Admin.

 

[Cecilie1200]

It's an inability that most of our population suffers from.

I'm fine with calling them out for being closed-minded, and quite illiberal. But I think it's dangerous to conflate PC censorship, done by private citizens and business, as a violation of free speech. And not just as a technical legal matter. A media outlet making decisions about what it will, and won't, publish IS free speech. It's just free speech you disagree with.

That said, the anger of the culture wars is fueling fascist yearnings on both sides. It's a real danger.

The problem is places like facebook and youtube and twitter, aren't the media in the traditional sense, they are more of a form of an electronic commons that takes the place of the old village square.

I know it goes against my libertarian leanings, but I almost think it's time to treat these places AS public commons, and thus obligated to protect the Rights of people using them, just as government would protect the village square.

I disagree. I think it's time to introduce them to the joys of the free market, and start looking for the Next Big Thing to replace them. If it's not out there today, it will be tomorrow.

The thing is platforms like facebook seem to favor the ONE BIG THING, to increase interconnectivity.

Better to just declare them a commons/utility and regulate them.

I pretty much never default to "the government should take over".

No takeover needed. There is ample framework for simple regulation.

Describe this framework, preferably with legal citations.

Not saying you're wrong. Just saying I'd like your idea spelled out before I weigh in, because I'm leery.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Then government should seize Facebook outright and declare it public property. Until then, it is NOT the "commons".

Doesn't have to be that way. It uses public/utility/common bandwidth to transmit its information and create it's common space.

Private management of the commons can be done, such as private management of roads and rails, or ports under government direction.

Sure, we can mix private and public concerns. Sort of the worst of both worlds. I'd rather avoid such corruption. If you want government to take over Facebook, then do it. Otherwise, lay off the arm-twisting.

How is it arm twisting to give them the cover of a requirement to be content-neutral when deciding their posting policies?

Well, first of all, "cover a requirement" is a detestable copout. Right up there with "just doing my job".

The commons justification is laughable. All it means is Facebook (Google, Twitter, take your pick...) is making a lot of money and Congress wants their cut.

What would following the 1st amendment cost facebook above and beyond its normal costs, and how would congress somehow get a cut of it?

How about their own First Amendment rights?

As detestable as I find the idea of social media companies censoring people for their political views, as much as I think they should be sued up the ass for it if a credible case can be made for them violating their service agreement with their customers, I do not think that private companies are obligated to the First Amendment the way the government is.

 

[Cecilie1200]

"We"?

Yeah. I can't even see the 'l' anymore.

When progressives win, we lose.

Or maybe you're one of those people hoping for a 2nd American Civil War.

Using government to bully Facebook is classic progressivism. Not sure how you steer around that.

How is making them follow the 1st amendment bullying them?

Facebook is already "following" the 1st Amendment. Let's look:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

All Facebook has to do to abide by the 1st Amendment is not be Congress, and not make laws abridging freedom of speech. Since Facebook isn't Congress, and it can neither make nor enforce laws, it's literally impossible for them to violate the First Amendment.

And this isn't just a legal 'technicality'. It's vital to understanding constitutionally limited government. The First Amendment is not a law. It's a restriction on government.

Again, this is why I never vote Republican. No matter how big or small their 'L' is, they really just don't get it.

Yes, I get the basics of it, but you ignore the impact of technology as well as the commons like nature of the internet, and more accurately large social media platforms.

So the theory is that they're too big and important to be allowed rights?