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.
Not if they are a platform which gives them the abity to be protected from what others say on it. Oddly enough sect 230 was to keep sites from having to censor others.I understand the sentiment, but the fact of the matter is that Facebook can, at its sole discretion, shit-can anything they want.
You don't have a "right" to say whatever you want to on Facebook...
Death threat. Internet is forever.You just posted free speech. Those will kill you by the way.
Cigarettes will kill him if he smokes. That’s a death prediction not a death threat.Death threat. Internet is forever.
Well, we KNOW that such is the case, the evidence has been posted and blasted all over the news but there is no way to take them to court. The courts do not care.Well, you need more than words. You need evidence. I'm not even saying it didn't happen. It might have, and we should take it very seriously. If the government is bullying the media it needs to stop.
But you're not taking it seriously. You're not offering evidence or pursuing convictions. You're just using it as an excuse for another cathartic Trumpster circle jerk. Along with destroying freedom of the press in the process.
You haven't the slightest clue when it comes to Constitutional rights. Aren't you the jackass always trolling for theocracy? You clearly want to do away with the First Amendment.
Facebook benefits the left and thats what libs like Golfing Gator wantThis is something Leftists like Golfing Gator and Superbadbrutha don't get. Facebook is the single largest social media platform in the country, let alone the world. And any chance to set up an "alternative" platform geared towards a more Conservative POV will never get off the ground. This is why Parler and MeWe don't ever get the same exposure and this is also why Zuckerberg needs to be pressured, and pressured HARD to lay off of Conservatives.
Sec 230 is a simple protection from having to fight off FRIVIOLIOUS lawsuits. That is it, period.Not if they are a platform which gives them the abity to be protected from what others say on it. Oddly enough sect 230 was to keep sites from having to censor others.
If they want to dictate what content is, that's publisher status and can be held legally liable for what they and others say.
They take the best of both and responsibility of neither.
Heh, it was written for AOL.Sec 230 is a simple protection from having to fight off FRIVIOLIOUS lawsuits. That is it, period.
It is not a case of having it both ways. It is EXACLTY the same as the protections offered gun companies from frivolous lawsuits as well. FB can, does and should curate its content and they should also not be responsible when you post something there that is moronic. These 2 concepts are not mutually exclusive and, indeed, the fastest way to kill speech on the internet is to take away sec 230. You will not get uncurated content (as though that will survive anyway as no one wants uncurated content) but instead will simply see the end of open discussion in its entirety.
The point is, the problem needs to be addressed and corrected. It shouldn't be used as an excuse for even more ill-conceived legislation.Well, we KNOW that such is the case, the evidence has been posted and blasted all over the news but there is no way to take them to court. The courts do not care.
This is what scares me about DeSantis. Unlike Trump, who only threatened and blustered, DeSantis is pushing this shit into law. He openly engages in retaliatory government - targeting and punishing political opponents, for purely political reasons. And, as you suggest, the Court doesn't give a shit. Neither do voters.The problem is, as you point out this thread shows so well, is those attacks are not just coming from the left but the right is right along there with them. The Orwellian named 'Disinformation Governance Board' was exactly that and make no mistake, that has not gone away nor will it fail to get established at some point but listening to the right in every congressional hearing they had with Facebook and Twitter was just littered with politicians openly threating those companies if they did not do what they wanted. DeSantis even passed legislation along these lines even if being a state representative gives it no real teeth it was done. He is likely to take the presidency in the future though and that trend against private property certainly is not going to change any time soon. These are crystal clear violations of the first and the fourth without any hope of being reigned in.
I'm honestly surprised that Congress hasn't whipped up some omnibus bill claiming significant control over social media. If they do, I look for many Republicans to join them. They're demanding it.At this point I am unsure if we are going to get past this with our fist amendment rights being recognizable anymore. What we do about it is beyond me though. You cannot fight something the VAST majority of people are demanding and, beyond that, none of them can be reasoned with. This thread makes that abundantly clear that facts are not even remotely relevant. None of these people understand fascism, how it is implemented or what role property owners play in a fascistic regime.
And?Heh, it was written for AOL.
nothing to do with guns.
Go away.
Indeed. The sec 230 thing is just something for them to latch onto. The provisions of 230 merely codify the decision that any sane court would come to anyway.Sec 230 is a simple protection from having to fight off FRIVIOLIOUS lawsuits. That is it, period.
It is not a case of having it both ways. It is EXACLTY the same as the protections offered gun companies from frivolous lawsuits as well. FB can, does and should curate its content and they should also not be responsible when you post something there that is moronic. These 2 concepts are not mutually exclusive and, indeed, the fastest way to kill speech on the internet is to take away sec 230. You will not get uncurated content (as though that will survive anyway as no one wants uncurated content) but instead will simply see the end of open discussion in its entirety.
While correct I am at a loss as to how.The point is, the problem needs to be addressed and corrected. It shouldn't be used as an excuse for even more ill-conceived legislation.
Exactly.This is what scares me about DeSantis. Unlike Trump, who only threatened and blustered, DeSantis is pushing this shit into law. He openly engages in retaliatory government - targeting and punishing political opponents, for purely political reasons. And, as you suggest, the Court doesn't give a shit. Neither do voters.
Power. They lack the power. They ALL want it but the republicans have not gained enough raw power to ensure it breaks their way. It is not the republican MO anyway. They typically let the democrats do the dumbest thing possible, like eliminating the filibuster for judicial nominees, and when they have the power they use that power 1000 times more effectively than the democrats do.I'm honestly surprised that Congress hasn't whipped up some omnibus bill claiming significant control over social media. If they do, I look for many Republicans to join them. They're demanding it.
There is no gun comparison.And?
What about that challenges anything I stated.
There is and you have not addressed WHY it is different.There is no gun comparison.
There is a separation of purpose and liability in sect 230.
It looks like Mark Zuckerberg has ordered his troops to remove any conservative who is making their opinion heard and are getting the word out well.
A group of some 18 Wyoming conservatives, who were exposing the Cheney lies and were being successful at getting the word out about her denial of due process and support of red flag laws which deny due process have been banned from face book. Facebook took actions based on their "community standards" but then failed to state why they banned these people. Funny how they still allow Death to America from many here.
In my case, we had just begun to go after the 87,000 IRS agents that are most certainly Bidens Secret Police. The Posse Comitatus Act stops the government from using military troops against the people. As IRS agents they are free to go after the people. They have bought millions of dollars in ammunition and weapons and there recent job posting mentioned using deadly force against We the People..
I posted this on Facebook:
View attachment 684563
META has now banned 18 conservatives in our group for comments like this. We were successful in helping stop Liz Cheney's re-election and now we set our sights on Democrats as a whole. Because they do not like the linkage to a fascist organization and how they were set up in the 1930's by another dictator, they are banning people who see these fascists for what they are. Face Book is now protecting fascism in the US.
We live in perilous times and we as Good Men and Women must stand up or we will lose our freedoms forever. Facebook is giving democrats donations in kind for active censorship of opposing views.
Feel free to post your experiences with Facebook or as I call them FASCISTBOOK. They are hard and fast removing any content damaging to democrat politicians.
ITs called the freedom to associate with those with like opinions. You all don't like our opinions. We have the right to be there as well, so your answer is not to debate them but to silence them... Why is that? Are your positions so weak that you cannot defend them?
I don't want to gloat, but I sure hope all the lefties standing up for private property rights remember this principle going forward.Social media companies are private companies. They have private property rights.
No, I would agree with those who say social media --- the biggest --- are now basically a public utility. After all, telephones weren't a public utility until suddenly they were, and that's about communication too. Same deal as telephones. I would like to see no political censoring; I don't like porn or openly inciting violence to individuals or sales talks --- so I guess I'm not for TOTALLY free speech, but political, even over-the-top stuff, yeah.
I don't want to gloat, but I sure hope all the lefties standing up for private property rights remember this principle going forward.
Not me. But then I'm also not a "right wing fascist", so you're 0 for 2.You right wing fascists seem to have forgotten this.
ROFLMAO.I don't want to gloat, but I sure hope all the lefties standing up for private property rights remember this principle going forward.
