Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
How is saying facebook has to be content neutral controlling them?
.
And who decides what's "neutral"? The Republicans currently running show? Or the next batch of liberal hooligans to take the reigns?
That's what I don't get. You think liberals are controlling Facebook now, but when government sinks its teeth into them, liberals will have even more control. What are you smoking?
potato and potahto.
Slim rationalizations for the desire to control others with government.
How is saying facebook has to be content neutral controlling them?
.
And who decides what's "neutral"? The Republicans currently running show? Or the next batch of liberal hooligans to take the reigns?
That's what I don't get. You think liberals are controlling Facebook, but when government sinks its teeth into them, liberals will have even more control. What are you smoking?
Then the (((liberals))) who control Facebook would be the ones taking government power in that case. What’s the difference?
The difference is that government can put you in jail, or kill you, if you defy them. Facebook can't do squat.
Sure they can. They can empower and protect those who can put you in jail and kill you. They can prevent you from criticizing them.
It is the same people. That is what you are not understanding. They were swept from political office but remain in control of media, the money and the administrative state.
How is saying facebook has to be content neutral controlling them?
.
And who decides what's "neutral"? The Republicans currently running show? Or the next batch of liberal hooligans to take the reigns?
That's what I don't get. You think liberals are controlling Facebook, but when government sinks its teeth into them, liberals will have even more control. What are you smoking?
Then the (((liberals))) who control Facebook would be the ones taking government power in that case. What’s the difference?
The difference is that government can put you in jail, or kill you, if you defy them. Facebook can't do squat.
Sure they can. They can empower and protect those who can put you in jail and kill you. They can prevent you from criticizing them.
It is the same people. That is what you are not understanding. They were swept from political office but remain in control of media, the money and the administrative state.
Another Republican on board with socialism. Go team!
And who decides what's "neutral"? The Republicans currently running show? Or the next batch of liberal hooligans to take the reigns?
That's what I don't get. You think liberals are controlling Facebook, but when government sinks its teeth into them, liberals will have even more control. What are you smoking?
Then the (((liberals))) who control Facebook would be the ones taking government power in that case. What’s the difference?
The difference is that government can put you in jail, or kill you, if you defy them. Facebook can't do squat.
Sure they can. They can empower and protect those who can put you in jail and kill you. They can prevent you from criticizing them.
It is the same people. That is what you are not understanding. They were swept from political office but remain in control of media, the money and the administrative state.
Another Republican on board with socialism. Go team!
I’m not a republican and I won’t join your suicide pact.
It’s different somehow when I feel I am being targeted for discrimination by a business.
These cases expose those that actually support property rights and business rights from those that merely pay lip service when it’s convenient
Again, the idea of "property" in a digital context, especially when you are saying the content on that "property" actually is the responsibility of the users, and not the platform is fuzzy at best.
I don’t think this issue is very fuzzy at all. Some of the same people that support Sweet Cakes by Melissa are now clutching their pearls b/c they feel Facebook is discriminating against them. Watching liberals and conservatives on here suddenly flip on these issues is as funny as it is hypocritical.
There is a difference. one is a point of sale, easily replaceable service. The other is a platform provider that contains a majority of the US population as users and hides behind legal protection to avoid prosecution based on it's own content, and that purports to be an open forum for people.
Micro and Marco.
Of course it’s different, the shoe is on the other foot. Now suddenly people think they have a right to post on Facebook or view videos of goats fainting on YouTube. It is silly to see people get upset when they have to live by the same standards they set for others.
It's very different, but not because of why you think it is. If facebook enjoys protections from it's content being used to prosecute it, why should it feel the need to censor some viewpoints?
If they want to police their platform, make them liable if they fail to do so.
No half measures here.
Again, the idea of "property" in a digital context, especially when you are saying the content on that "property" actually is the responsibility of the users, and not the platform is fuzzy at best.
I don’t think this issue is very fuzzy at all. Some of the same people that support Sweet Cakes by Melissa are now clutching their pearls b/c they feel Facebook is discriminating against them. Watching liberals and conservatives on here suddenly flip on these issues is as funny as it is hypocritical.
There is a difference. one is a point of sale, easily replaceable service. The other is a platform provider that contains a majority of the US population as users and hides behind legal protection to avoid prosecution based on it's own content, and that purports to be an open forum for people.
Micro and Marco.
Of course it’s different, the shoe is on the other foot. Now suddenly people think they have a right to post on Facebook or view videos of goats fainting on YouTube. It is silly to see people get upset when they have to live by the same standards they set for others.
It's very different, but not because of why you think it is. If facebook enjoys protections from it's content being used to prosecute it, why should it feel the need to censor some viewpoints?
If they want to police their platform, make them liable if they fail to do so.
No half measures here.
Perhaps they don’t want their brand associated with people they don’t like. The only thing these people understand is money, the best course of action is hit them where hurts by not using their free services anymore. If enough people do, they’ll change their ways or lose the market share to another platform. Getting the government involved isn’t the solution.
I don’t think this issue is very fuzzy at all. Some of the same people that support Sweet Cakes by Melissa are now clutching their pearls b/c they feel Facebook is discriminating against them. Watching liberals and conservatives on here suddenly flip on these issues is as funny as it is hypocritical.
There is a difference. one is a point of sale, easily replaceable service. The other is a platform provider that contains a majority of the US population as users and hides behind legal protection to avoid prosecution based on it's own content, and that purports to be an open forum for people.
Micro and Marco.
Of course it’s different, the shoe is on the other foot. Now suddenly people think they have a right to post on Facebook or view videos of goats fainting on YouTube. It is silly to see people get upset when they have to live by the same standards they set for others.
It's very different, but not because of why you think it is. If facebook enjoys protections from it's content being used to prosecute it, why should it feel the need to censor some viewpoints?
If they want to police their platform, make them liable if they fail to do so.
No half measures here.
Perhaps they don’t want their brand associated with people they don’t like. The only thing these people understand is money, the best course of action is hit them where hurts by not using their free services anymore. If enough people do, they’ll change their ways or lose the market share to another platform. Getting the government involved isn’t the solution.
Giving over a major player in the social media game to progressive wholesale isn't either.
Making up a bunch of baby facebooks for each political view isn't either.
At a minimum if they want to be all controlling and shit, remove the legal protection they have and force them to monitor the content they provide.
If they want to own it, make them own it.
Giving over a major player in the social media game to progressive wholesale isn't either.
Conservatives need to get with reality. They need everything separate. Start a You Tube competitor, have separate colleges, work places. The nation is too divide to imagine coexisting.
The American MSM is dominated by Communist/Democrat assholes. If anyone should be complaining, it would have to be Conservatives. They've been the victims of Democrat Media Bias and censorship-attempts, for decades. They even receive Taxpayer-funding to push their propaganda by way of NPR and PBS.
So, y'all Communists shouldn't be complaining. You control most of the corrupt American MSM. These two women were wronged. They were banned for merely being Trump supporters. So like i said, fuck Zuckerberg, Soros, and the Democratic Party.
Victim is a very poor choice of a word. If I am being attacked it is because I am feared or someone wishes to decrease my influence or power.
NPR and PBS are prime examples of the corrupt Communist/Democrat-dominated MSM. They shouldn't be receiving Tax Dollars. So yes, Conservatives have been the victims for the most part. You can't be a victim if you're in complete control of the apparatus. And that's the case with Communists/Democrats. It is what it is.
Coming from a poster who lives in a country where his boss has murdered 200 journalists who posted the truth.
Putin hates the free press. So does Trump. Neither of these authoritarians want people to have access to facts or to know what they’re really doing.
Russian trolls calling the US media “biased” would be laughable if the intent wasn’t so serious.
Then the (((liberals))) who control Facebook would be the ones taking government power in that case. What’s the difference?
The difference is that government can put you in jail, or kill you, if you defy them. Facebook can't do squat.
Sure they can. They can empower and protect those who can put you in jail and kill you. They can prevent you from criticizing them.
It is the same people. That is what you are not understanding. They were swept from political office but remain in control of media, the money and the administrative state.
Another Republican on board with socialism. Go team!
I’m not a republican and I won’t join your suicide pact.
Green Party?
.. and uh, suicide? You really think government controlling Facebook is a matter of life and death? It's a fucking website!
There is a difference. one is a point of sale, easily replaceable service. The other is a platform provider that contains a majority of the US population as users and hides behind legal protection to avoid prosecution based on it's own content, and that purports to be an open forum for people.
Micro and Marco.
Of course it’s different, the shoe is on the other foot. Now suddenly people think they have a right to post on Facebook or view videos of goats fainting on YouTube. It is silly to see people get upset when they have to live by the same standards they set for others.
It's very different, but not because of why you think it is. If facebook enjoys protections from it's content being used to prosecute it, why should it feel the need to censor some viewpoints?
If they want to police their platform, make them liable if they fail to do so.
No half measures here.
Perhaps they don’t want their brand associated with people they don’t like. The only thing these people understand is money, the best course of action is hit them where hurts by not using their free services anymore. If enough people do, they’ll change their ways or lose the market share to another platform. Getting the government involved isn’t the solution.
Giving over a major player in the social media game to progressive wholesale isn't either.
Making up a bunch of baby facebooks for each political view isn't either.
At a minimum if they want to be all controlling and shit, remove the legal protection they have and force them to monitor the content they provide.
If they want to own it, make them own it.
Facebook has a right to associate their business with whomever they damn well please. If you don’t like it, log off and never return. You don’t have a right to their services, just like don’t have a right to force someone to bake a cake for my queer wedding. People want it both ways on this issue and I think it’s bullshit.
The American MSM is dominated by Communist/Democrat assholes. If anyone should be complaining, it would have to be Conservatives. They've been the victims of Democrat Media Bias and censorship-attempts, for decades. They even receive Taxpayer-funding to push their propaganda by way of NPR and PBS.
So, y'all Communists shouldn't be complaining. You control most of the corrupt American MSM. These two women were wronged. They were banned for merely being Trump supporters. So like i said, fuck Zuckerberg, Soros, and the Democratic Party.
Victim is a very poor choice of a word. If I am being attacked it is because I am feared or someone wishes to decrease my influence or power.
So yes, Conservatives have been the victims for the most part. .
You poor snowflake victims.....
Break up Facebook google YouTube abc nbc cbs msnbc Twitter.
It’s the only answer. Give them credit where credit is due...they learned a hard lesson last election about giving Americans a means of communicating without liberal filters. They don’t intend for it to happen again. Nothing more dangerous to the ruling elites and money interests than Americans excersising free speech.
Conservatives need to get with reality. They need everything separate. Start a You Tube competitor, have separate colleges, work places. The nation is too divide to imagine coexisting.
Conservatives need to get with reality. They need everything separate. Start a You Tube competitor, have separate colleges, work places. The nation is too divide to imagine coexisting.
Good idea. But the odds are longer than you think. For instance Gab and Voat were created as alternatives to Twitter and Reddit, respectfully, when those two first began expelling people critical of democrats.
Apple and android immediately banned Gab and Voat from their app stores. (I think Voat May be back on Android.)
PayPal refuses to process donations to Gab and visa says they are considering a ban.
Patreon, squarespace, gofundme and applepay then moved in with their own bans. Cloudflare denies ddos support. Google demotes search results.
Their intent is to scrub the net of information and community that do not have the Marxist imprimatur. Power and money are not so easily overcome.
The American MSM is dominated by Communist/Democrat assholes. If anyone should be complaining, it would have to be Conservatives. They've been the victims of Democrat Media Bias and censorship-attempts, for decades. They even receive Taxpayer-funding to push their propaganda by way of NPR and PBS.
So, y'all Communists shouldn't be complaining. You control most of the corrupt American MSM. These two women were wronged. They were banned for merely being Trump supporters. So like i said, fuck Zuckerberg, Soros, and the Democratic Party.
Victim is a very poor choice of a word. If I am being attacked it is because I am feared or someone wishes to decrease my influence or power.
NPR and PBS are prime examples of the corrupt Communist/Democrat-dominated MSM. They shouldn't be receiving Tax Dollars. So yes, Conservatives have been the victims for the most part. You can't be a victim if you're in complete control of the apparatus. And that's the case with Communists/Democrats. It is what it is.
Coming from a poster who lives in a country where his boss has murdered 200 journalists who posted the truth.
Putin hates the free press. So does Trump. Neither of these authoritarians want people to have access to facts or to know what they’re really doing.
Russian trolls calling the US media “biased” would be laughable if the intent wasn’t so serious.
Aren’t you a foreigner ? Stop interfering in our elections.
I'm not sure if they meant it that way, it's just they are completely incompetent at Google and Facebook and have never cared about privacy, and have allowed pretty much anyone to say anything as long as it makes them money.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.
The thing you're bumping up against here is the fact that, in a free society, government has less power than the people. And in a free market, economic power (wealth) has more power to influence society than government does. That drives socialists crazy and they are forever after that power.
Well a truly free market allows the power of wealth to dominate society- in order to enrich those who are wealthy.
And of course eliminate those pesky regulations that prevent profits- like food safety regulations and fire safety regulations.
Nice to see your true colors shining through. All that speaking up for the rights of business was decidedly out-of-character for you. Did it hurt?
