It feels oppressive when Facebook, Twitter and Youtube start banning content based on political bias

[bendog]

That's not true. I think French nude films are liberal and I like them. But facebook won't have em.

 

[Norman]

CNN is not generating fake news?

Is that your final answer?

OAN is not generating fake news. Is that your final answer? It's irrelevant.

Facebook and the others didn't drop Jones over fake. He can get their asses sued, just like his fat ass is getting sued. And the vast maj of people think he's an obnoxious fat fuck who but for the grace of God would have been left for dead in a parking lot.

That is the wrong answer. They were generating fake news in that very clip.

Alex Jones being fat has nothing to do with the issue. Bunch of fat fucks are allowed to freely operate on the platforms as long as they have views such as #CancelWhitePeople.

I don't watch vids and blind links. But it doesn't matter if it's "fake news." You have an example it, and everyone has there's.

Fox broadcast shit about seth rich.

None of that has shit to do with Jones and Facebook.

Indeed, it is fake news, which OldLady claimed it was not. My entire point...

The only relevance of fake news is that Jones seeks to publish fake news on private social media outlets, which can lead to the outlets being sued for his content and losing users who find him noxious.

Sued for what?

It's not illegal to tell lies on youtube. If it was, the networks would be in big trouble.

You are making shit up constantly.

He got banned because he was right wing and massively popular. That's all, not hard to grasp.

 

[bendog]

OAN is not generating fake news. Is that your final answer? It's irrelevant.

Facebook and the others didn't drop Jones over fake. He can get their asses sued, just like his fat ass is getting sued. And the vast maj of people think he's an obnoxious fat fuck who but for the grace of God would have been left for dead in a parking lot.

That is the wrong answer. They were generating fake news in that very clip.

Alex Jones being fat has nothing to do with the issue. Bunch of fat fucks are allowed to freely operate on the platforms as long as they have views such as #CancelWhitePeople.

I don't watch vids and blind links. But it doesn't matter if it's "fake news." You have an example it, and everyone has there's.

Fox broadcast shit about seth rich.

None of that has shit to do with Jones and Facebook.

Indeed, it is fake news, which OldLady claimed it was not. My entire point...

The only relevance of fake news is that Jones seeks to publish fake news on private social media outlets, which can lead to the outlets being sued for his content and losing users who find him noxious.

Sued for what?

It's not illegal to tell lies on youtube. If it was, the networks would be in big trouble.

You are making shit up constantly.

The networks broadcast on youtube? you make this shit up by the moment.

And you equate sandy hook lies with cnn. You suck, asshole

 

[Norman]

That is the wrong answer. They were generating fake news in that very clip.

Alex Jones being fat has nothing to do with the issue. Bunch of fat fucks are allowed to freely operate on the platforms as long as they have views such as #CancelWhitePeople.

I don't watch vids and blind links. But it doesn't matter if it's "fake news." You have an example it, and everyone has there's.

Fox broadcast shit about seth rich.

None of that has shit to do with Jones and Facebook.

Indeed, it is fake news, which OldLady claimed it was not. My entire point...

The only relevance of fake news is that Jones seeks to publish fake news on private social media outlets, which can lead to the outlets being sued for his content and losing users who find him noxious.

Sued for what?

It's not illegal to tell lies on youtube. If it was, the networks would be in big trouble.

You are making shit up constantly.

The networks broadcast on youtube? you make this shit up by the moment.

I mean networks such as youtube, facebook etc. Reading comprehension...

But yes, CNN has youtube channel. Is there anything you get right?

 

[bendog]

I don't watch vids and blind links. But it doesn't matter if it's "fake news." You have an example it, and everyone has there's.

Fox broadcast shit about seth rich.

None of that has shit to do with Jones and Facebook.

Indeed, it is fake news, which OldLady claimed it was not. My entire point...

The only relevance of fake news is that Jones seeks to publish fake news on private social media outlets, which can lead to the outlets being sued for his content and losing users who find him noxious.

Sued for what?

It's not illegal to tell lies on youtube. If it was, the networks would be in big trouble.

You are making shit up constantly.

The networks broadcast on youtube? you make this shit up by the moment.

I mean networks such as youtube, facebook etc. Reading comprehension...

But yes, CNN has youtube channel.

you tube in not a network, asshole moron

 

[Norman]

Indeed, it is fake news, which OldLady claimed it was not. My entire point...

The only relevance of fake news is that Jones seeks to publish fake news on private social media outlets, which can lead to the outlets being sued for his content and losing users who find him noxious.

Sued for what?

It's not illegal to tell lies on youtube. If it was, the networks would be in big trouble.

You are making shit up constantly.

The networks broadcast on youtube? you make this shit up by the moment.

I mean networks such as youtube, facebook etc. Reading comprehension...

But yes, CNN has youtube channel.

you tube in not a network, asshole moron

Just a question, do you EVER get anything right?

Youtube is a social media network. Have you seen the film called the social network which is about the creation of Facebook? It's rather clear at this point that all you are capable of doing is making shit up.

 

[ptbw forever]

If conservatives are so butt hurt that Jones no longer is allowed on certain platforms, here's a solution.............................

If liberals can start up sites like Facebook and YouTube, why can't conservatives?

Liberals didn’t start up sites like Facebook.

 

[Seawytch]

Those three platforms alone account for a huge amount of traffic and information flow on the internet. The internet in general played a very important role in the last election, and will probably play an even more important role in future ones. They technically have the right to do whatever they want with their platforms, but how is the right supposed to not feel oppressed by left wing censorship when giant internet platforms like those, who currently play a very important role in politics, start censoring right wing content? Fine, the platforms are legally entitled to do so. Let's have a philosophical discussion though. What about morality and intellectualism? They have the right, but are they right to do it?

Collation does not imply causation. Just because the most offensive sites are run by "conservatives", does not make it political that they're being taken down.

 

[ptbw forever]

Jones is just pissed that he no longer has a site he doesn't have to pay for to broadcast his b.s.

are you really happy about this? jones is an idiot, yes. but he's not above the rights we all in fact share. i'm not. are you? who are we to say "you get rights, you don't"? how can that be beneficial for anyone in the end because the left can't help themselves give them a "victory" they kick it up and go for more. human nature i suppose as well. they in turn start eating themselves and we're not far from that happening.

if you don't like jones, don't listen to him. block him from facebook and wa-la problem solved. but to ban people because you don't like what they say - i can promise you one day you'll be banned for what you say.

is that really where we as a country wants to go?

Private companies have the right to pick and choose whom they wish to serve. If we force Facebook to carry Jones' material, isn't that also wrong? Facebook is a private company. You guys bitched about a baker who was being forced to bake a cake for a gay couple, and cheered when SCOTUS ruled in favor of the baker. How is Facebook different from the baker? Both have the right to choose where their products are used and by whom.

yet facebook has never said "we're a liberal company, fuck you conservatives" - they tout their services for all. if that is the route they now wish to go and just say "fuck it, we're liberal and you're not allowed to play here" then fine. let them do that. but to continue to say they're here for free speech EXCEPT YOU GUYS is wrong.

if facebook were to do this their entire model would have to change and they know this. if they could limit people's speech on their network then why were they in front of the senate and the house again? i do believe their censorship came into question and of course they deny it. they are like textbook passive aggressive. a very "liberal" trait.

i'm not going to chase strange analogies down the hallway however.

There wasn't a sign in the baker's shop that said they don't bake cakes for gay couples.

They do bake for gay couples, moron.

 

[ptbw forever]

Those three platforms alone account for a huge amount of traffic and information flow on the internet. The internet in general played a very important role in the last election, and will probably play an even more important role in future ones. They technically have the right to do whatever they want with their platforms, but how is the right supposed to not feel oppressed by left wing censorship when giant internet platforms like those, who currently play a very important role in politics, start censoring right wing content? Fine, the platforms are legally entitled to do so. Let's have a philosophical discussion though. What about morality and intellectualism? They have the right, but are they right to do it?

Collation does not imply causation. Just because the most offensive sites are run by "conservatives", does not make it political that they're being taken down.

All of the offensive sites are run by “progressives”.

 

[miketx]

And the silencing of conservatives they say is not happening, continues.

 

[ABikerSailor]

If conservatives are so butt hurt that Jones no longer is allowed on certain platforms, here's a solution.............................

If liberals can start up sites like Facebook and YouTube, why can't conservatives?

Liberals didn’t start up sites like Facebook.

Really? If Facebook is a site that was started by conservatives, why are they banning Alex Jones? I thought he was one of the heroes for the right.

 

[iceberg]

Jones is just pissed that he no longer has a site he doesn't have to pay for to broadcast his b.s.

are you really happy about this? jones is an idiot, yes. but he's not above the rights we all in fact share. i'm not. are you? who are we to say "you get rights, you don't"? how can that be beneficial for anyone in the end because the left can't help themselves give them a "victory" they kick it up and go for more. human nature i suppose as well. they in turn start eating themselves and we're not far from that happening.

if you don't like jones, don't listen to him. block him from facebook and wa-la problem solved. but to ban people because you don't like what they say - i can promise you one day you'll be banned for what you say.

is that really where we as a country wants to go?

Private companies have the right to pick and choose whom they wish to serve. If we force Facebook to carry Jones' material, isn't that also wrong? Facebook is a private company. You guys bitched about a baker who was being forced to bake a cake for a gay couple, and cheered when SCOTUS ruled in favor of the baker. How is Facebook different from the baker? Both have the right to choose where their products are used and by whom.

yet facebook has never said "we're a liberal company, fuck you conservatives" - they tout their services for all. if that is the route they now wish to go and just say "fuck it, we're liberal and you're not allowed to play here" then fine. let them do that. but to continue to say they're here for free speech EXCEPT YOU GUYS is wrong.

if facebook were to do this their entire model would have to change and they know this. if they could limit people's speech on their network then why were they in front of the senate and the house again? i do believe their censorship came into question and of course they deny it. they are like textbook passive aggressive. a very "liberal" trait.

i'm not going to chase strange analogies down the hallway however.

There wasn't a sign in the baker's shop that said they don't bake cakes for gay couples.

They do bake for gay couples, moron.

from what i understand, they will not make a custom cake but the gay couple was free to buy any cake that was already made and do with it what they wish.

 

[miketx]

If conservatives are so butt hurt that Jones no longer is allowed on certain platforms, here's a solution.............................

If liberals can start up sites like Facebook and YouTube, why can't conservatives?

Liberals didn’t start up sites like Facebook.

Really? If Facebook is a site that was started by conservatives, why are they banning Alex Jones? I thought he was one of the heroes for the right.

Surely as smart as you pretend to be, you can figure that one out.

 

[ptbw forever]

If conservatives are so butt hurt that Jones no longer is allowed on certain platforms, here's a solution.............................

If liberals can start up sites like Facebook and YouTube, why can't conservatives?

Liberals didn’t start up sites like Facebook.

Really? If Facebook is a site that was started by conservatives, why are they banning Alex Jones? I thought he was one of the heroes for the right.

The idea was Zuckerberg’s, but the tech and the market was not.

 

[Seawytch]

Those three platforms alone account for a huge amount of traffic and information flow on the internet. The internet in general played a very important role in the last election, and will probably play an even more important role in future ones. They technically have the right to do whatever they want with their platforms, but how is the right supposed to not feel oppressed by left wing censorship when giant internet platforms like those, who currently play a very important role in politics, start censoring right wing content? Fine, the platforms are legally entitled to do so. Let's have a philosophical discussion though. What about morality and intellectualism? They have the right, but are they right to do it?

Collation does not imply causation. Just because the most offensive sites are run by "conservatives", does not make it political that they're being taken down.

All of the offensive sites are run by “progressives”.

Alex Jones isn't a progressive...a 9/11 truther, yes, but not progressive.

Jones should be banned like Stormfront was. Make all the crazy racists go to Russia for their internet needs.

 

[iceberg]

And the silencing of conservatives they say is not happening, continues.

View attachment 209044

wow.

now if they only gave the same effort to stop spam.

 

[ptbw forever]

Those three platforms alone account for a huge amount of traffic and information flow on the internet. The internet in general played a very important role in the last election, and will probably play an even more important role in future ones. They technically have the right to do whatever they want with their platforms, but how is the right supposed to not feel oppressed by left wing censorship when giant internet platforms like those, who currently play a very important role in politics, start censoring right wing content? Fine, the platforms are legally entitled to do so. Let's have a philosophical discussion though. What about morality and intellectualism? They have the right, but are they right to do it?

Collation does not imply causation. Just because the most offensive sites are run by "conservatives", does not make it political that they're being taken down.

All of the offensive sites are run by “progressives”.

Alex Jones isn't a progressive...a 9/11 truther, yes, but not progressive.

Jones should be banned like Stormfront was. Make all the crazy racists go to Russia for their internet needs.

The New York Times should be banned.

Salon should be banned.

The Huffington Post should be banned.

Slate should be banned.

Raw Story should be banned.

Buzzfeed should be banned.

All the black supremacist sites should be banned.

Make all the anti-white racists go to South Africa for their internet needs.

 

[Marion Morrison]

If conservatives are so butt hurt that Jones no longer is allowed on certain platforms, here's a solution.............................

If liberals can start up sites like Facebook and YouTube, why can't conservatives?

YOU MEAN .... CAPITALISM? DEMOCRACY? Poor Mr. Jones.

Those three platforms alone account for a huge amount of traffic and information flow on the internet. The internet in general played a very important role in the last election, and will probably play an even more important role in future ones. They technically have the right to do whatever they want with their platforms, but how is the right supposed to not feel oppressed by left wing censorship when giant internet platforms like those, who currently play a very important role in politics, start censoring right wing content? Fine, the platforms are legally entitled to do so. Let's have a philosophical discussion though. What about morality and intellectualism? They have the right, but are they right to do it?

Yes, they have a right to do it.

And no, let's not pretend they're truly in favor of freedom of expression, the most liberal of ideals.

None of the Regressive Left is, because the Regressive Left is not liberal.
.

Wellllllll, it's not like they're a monopoly or anything. It's not like the right lacks funds.

They are monopolies, dumbass.

Show me a competitor for each platform.

Only 1 has a viable competitor.

Try looking up the definition of monopoly, dumbass. And not the game.

You fucking twit, I've known the definition of a monopoly since 7th grade. I don't


see you providing any examples of competitors, therefore=monopoly. Derp!

You know, in the other threads where Alex Jones got kicked off of Facebook and YouTube, I've seen several posters on here claim that they never participate in social media. Some have said that the only reason they use social media is to get music.

Hey.....................if you are posting here on USMB, you are participating in social media. Here is the definition......................

so·cial me·di·a
noun
noun: social media; plural noun: social medias

1. websites and applications that enable users to create and share content or to participate in social networking.

Now, everyone who posts on here is creating or sharing content, even if it's just commentary on news articles. And, there are communities on here where people participate in social networking.

Another poster pointed out that since USMB is anonymous, it's a sub classification of social media. And, while that may be true, participating in a sub category of social media is still participating in social media.

Sorry, but if you post on USMB, you are participating in social media.

 

[miketx]

If conservatives are so butt hurt that Jones no longer is allowed on certain platforms, here's a solution.............................

If liberals can start up sites like Facebook and YouTube, why can't conservatives?

YOU MEAN .... CAPITALISM? DEMOCRACY? Poor Mr. Jones.

Those three platforms alone account for a huge amount of traffic and information flow on the internet. The internet in general played a very important role in the last election, and will probably play an even more important role in future ones. They technically have the right to do whatever they want with their platforms, but how is the right supposed to not feel oppressed by left wing censorship when giant internet platforms like those, who currently play a very important role in politics, start censoring right wing content? Fine, the platforms are legally entitled to do so. Let's have a philosophical discussion though. What about morality and intellectualism? They have the right, but are they right to do it?

Yes, they have a right to do it.

And no, let's not pretend they're truly in favor of freedom of expression, the most liberal of ideals.

None of the Regressive Left is, because the Regressive Left is not liberal.
.

Wellllllll, it's not like they're a monopoly or anything. It's not like the right lacks funds.

They are monopolies, dumbass.

Show me a competitor for each platform.

Only 1 has a viable competitor.

Try looking up the definition of monopoly, dumbass. And not the game.

You fucking twit, I've known the definition of a monopoly since 7th grade. I don't think it means what you think it means, mongoloid.

You know, in the other threads where Alex Jones got kicked off of Facebook and YouTube, I've seen several posters on here claim that they never participate in social media. Some have said that the only reason they use social media is to get music.

Hey.....................if you are posting here on USMB, you are participating in social media. Here is the definition......................

so·cial me·di·a
noun
noun: social media; plural noun: social medias

1. websites and applications that enable users to create and share content or to participate in social networking.

Now, everyone who posts on here is creating or sharing content, even if it's just commentary on news articles. And, there are communities on here where people participate in social networking.

Another poster pointed out that since USMB is anonymous, it's a sub classification of social media. And, while that may be true, participating in a sub category of social media is still participating in social media.

Sorry, but if you post on USMB, you are participating in social media.

View attachment 209055

He thinks its that game with the get out of jail free card!