Is free speech under attack?

[Marener]

Where anyone got the idea that conservatives defend free speech, I’ll never know. They only want free speech from themselves.

Say something they don’t like, bam, lawsuit.

 

[dblack]

Well you don't. The social media platform has every right to delete your post or ban you entirely.

Else USMB would be entangled in about five thousand lawsuits.

Hypothetical - Trump wins. Then "requests" that facebook block any references to the Stormy Daniels affair. Because it's disinformation, of course. Then that afternoon delivers a speech suggesting that social media needs to be regulated if they don't get their house in order. Hmmm...

You ok with that?

 

[leftwinger]

In 2020 they began to Block Conservative voices on FB Google youtube Yahoo, as examples.

Yes, there is censorship but it is one way. If you are Deep State you can post or air LW hogwash all you want. The Media is 100% Deep State and will block anything that isn't (CNN MSLSD ABC NBC CBS PBS) etc. Those who tune it in are drooling imbeciles.

First time since 2020 I was forced to glance a NBC morning BS (waiting room). Two blacks (or one just dark?) and a white lady going on and on and on showing Blacks in the olympics. Also going all-in on Black mayor of LA getting ready for 2028. One white (Tom cruise) planting some Olympic flag up the in Hollywood hills or passing it off to another short fag.

The fags, the makeup the voices..........unbearable in the media. The Country has been destroyed. Tampons in the Boys rooms. Are you people seeing what the heck is being done to American Children? College age Children?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Then "requests" that facebook block any references to the Stormy Daniels affair.

And the social media platform can say yes or no, at their prerogative.

And social media is already regulated.

The government trying to somehow legislate. That lies about trump cannot be posted on. Social media would never pass the test in a court.

 

[dblack]

And the clsoxial medianplatform can say yes or no, at their prerogative.

And social media is already regulated.

Can you answer the question, rather than sliding around it? If you're saying you ARE ok with - I sort of doubt that. And I bet you'd be howling if such a "request" were exposed.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Can you answer the question, rather than sliding around it?

Yes, it's fine. Social media is and should be regulated.

There are specific regulations. I would not be fine with. The courts will take care of that.

 

[citygator]

Man

You have gone off the deep end. “Insurrectionist” hahahahahahahahaah

It was in their legal filing. At least keep up with the arguments so that you can keep up with the arguments.

 

[dblack]

Yes, it's fine. Social media is and should be regulated.

There are specific regulations. I would not be fine with. The courts will take care of that.

Sorry. I don't believe you. That's a compliment. I think you have more sense than that, and you'd rightfully be freaking out of Trump tried that kind of media coercion.

Sadly, you're a partisan, and you'll say whatever stupid shit is necessary to defend your "team".

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Sorry. I don't believe you. That's a compliment. I think you have more sense than that, and you'd rightfully be freaking out of Trump tried that kind of media coercion.

Sadly, you're a partisan, and you'll say whatever stupid shit is necessary to defend your "team".

No, the social media company has every right to say "fine, regulate us like other publishers."

That regulation does and would not include not being able to publish bad information.

 

[task0778]

Free Speech is always under attack. Thats why we have the First Amendment.

This is my opinion too.

Hypothetical - Trump wins. Then "requests" that facebook block any references to the Stormy Daniels affair. Because it's disinformation, of course. Then that afternoon delivers a speech suggesting that social media needs to be regulated if they don't get their house in order. Hmmm...

You ok with that?

Yes. Anybody can request or suggest anything they want to, you don't think Biden has been doing that too over the past 3 and a half years? Trump has the same right to free speech as anyone else and he can say what he wants. But actions speak louder than words, and I have no doubt that the Supreme court will not allow Trump or any other president to deny someone's free speech by executive action.

 

[dblack]

No, the social media company has every right to say "fine, regulate us like other publishers."

That regulation does and would not include not being able to publish bad information.

 

[dblack]

This is my opinion too.


Yes. Anybody can request or suggest anything they want to, you don't think Biden has been doing that too over the past 3 and a half years?

I know he has - its been documented.

Government using the implied threat of punitive legislation to coerce favors from private businesses should never be tolerated.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Aw, did you not get the prescribed answer you hoped to fit into your prescribed talking points?

Now you struggle for thoughts in response?

That's okay. Take all the time you need.

 

[dblack]

Aw, did you not get the prescribed answer you hoped to fit into your prescribed talking points?

Now you struggle for thoughts in response?

That's okay. Take all the time you need.

I understand. It's different when your team does it.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I understand. It's different when your team does it.

Haha, if you have to make up a fantasy to have a point... you don't actually have a point.

Good luck.

 

[whitehall]

We all know what it means to call "fire" in a crowded movie theatre but who gets to judge "misinformation"? Be careful what you wish for. If misinformation was a crime the executives of all the major news networks would be in jail for lying about Biden's health for two or three years..

 

[Slade3200]

We all saw what happened in the UK. Is this coming here? Violence isn’t protected and now many on the left want to make “misinformation” illegal. But misinformation is subjective and subject to interpretation.
Good article attached from thehill.com along with some other pertinent data.

Are you for or against free speech if that speech includes what you perceive as misinformation but not violence?

Democrats cry foul as anti-free speech allies turn against them

“Like Saturn, the Revolution devours its children.”

thehill.com

Adam Schiff renews the Democratic war against the First Amendment - Washington Examiner

In September 2014, 54 Democratic senators voted to repeal the First Amendment of the Constitution.They were supporting a proposed constitutional amendment by Sen. Tom Udall, D-N.M., whose stated goal was to overturn the Supreme Court’s landmark Citizens United decision, which struck down a host...

www.washingtonexaminer.com

Let’s see if we can have productive conversation about the subject….

With all the lies and disinformation circulating around our political atmosphere how would you suggest we address that issue while maintaining first amendment rights?

 

[task0778]

Government using the implied threat of punitive legislation to coerce favors from private businesses should never be tolerated.

I dunno about that. Depends on what favors, how punitive the legislation is, and what the implication is and the strength of the threat. Also whether or not that legislation has any chance to becoming law. A president can threaten private businesses all he wants but following through with legislation is another story. And private businesses are not without ways to fight back, litigation, campaign donations withheld or given to the other side, etc. These days there is so much bombastic rhetoric that IMHO is mostly political BS.

 

[LibertyKid]

I provided an example of free speech under attack from the right.

I guess you got triggered by exposing the right wing hypocrisy.

GARM was a front, a facade to censure information:

House Judiciary Committee Report Exposes Shadowy Corporate Coordination to Silence Conservatives

The House Judiciary Committee released a damning report Wednesday morning with shocking details of corporate collusion to silence conservative viewpoints through targeting Breitbart News, Joe Rogan, and Twitter (now X) among others.

judiciary.house.gov

 

[LeftofLeft]

We all saw what happened in the UK. Is this coming here? Violence isn’t protected and now many on the left want to make “misinformation” illegal. But misinformation is subjective and subject to interpretation.
Good article attached from thehill.com along with some other pertinent data.

Are you for or against free speech if that speech includes what you perceive as misinformation but not violence?

Democrats cry foul as anti-free speech allies turn against them

“Like Saturn, the Revolution devours its children.”

thehill.com

Adam Schiff renews the Democratic war against the First Amendment - Washington Examiner

In September 2014, 54 Democratic senators voted to repeal the First Amendment of the Constitution.They were supporting a proposed constitutional amendment by Sen. Tom Udall, D-N.M., whose stated goal was to overturn the Supreme Court’s landmark Citizens United decision, which struck down a host...

www.washingtonexaminer.com

Misinformation is largely subjective, like you said. The problem is the Left are appointing themselves as authority and enforcement. Debates surrounding Climate Change and COVID Vaccinations are prime examples. I’ve seen a lot of counter arguments and challenges. The Left automatically tags this as misinformation.

This is very dangerous slope that we’ve seen take root in socialist, communist, and dictatorship nations.