The election is over so why is social media still banning/deleting posts they deem wrong?

[Daryl Hunt]

The purveyors of 4 years of fake news are now the arbiters of real news.

Unreal

here is a fitting message.

You idiots spent 4 years chasing the russian boogeyman/Trump connection based on NO EVIDENCE.
Meanwhile REAL NEWS based on REAL EVIDENCE about the Biden family was dismissed as fake.

YOU
HAVE
NO
CREDIBILITY

And you have no President or standing or Party other than the Party of the Rump and the John Birch Society. I think I like my odds better.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

The purveyors of 4 years of fake news are now the arbiters of real news.

Unreal

here is a fitting message.

You idiots spent 4 years chasing the russian boogeyman/Trump connection based on NO EVIDENCE.
Meanwhile REAL NEWS based on REAL EVIDENCE about the Biden family was dismissed as fake.

YOU
HAVE
NO
CREDIBILITY

And you have no President or standing or Party other than the Party of the Rump and the John Birch Society. I think I like my odds better.

Your babbling is meaningless

 

[LiberalsLIE]

Whats the goal here?

Suppress anger from the right befor the runoff senate race?

Force congress to break them up/strip them of protections?

Think they can permanently control public discourse if they just keep the propaganda machine oiled with the fresh remains of the 1st amendment?

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

www.bloomberg.com

Seriously can't say this loud enough....

FUCK THESE COMPANIES!

 

[my2¢]

There are plenty of social media sites around and each one must decide for itself what editoral control they wish to exert. The charge of propaganda control that I'm reading about here isn't all that different from the liberals' bellyaching when Rush Limbaugh first became popular. It seemed strange to me (at the time) because back in the day we learned that if you didn't like what was on then get up and change the channel. The OP concludes with a policy I've always taken to heart, my choice is to not patronize those entities that I don't trust. Perhaps the difference is that I never had a problem with Rush or Fox News not catering to my taste.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

There are plenty of social media sites around and each one must decide for itself what editoral control they wish to exert. The charge of propaganda control that I'm reading about here isn't all that different from the liberals' bellyaching when Rush Limbaugh first became popular. It seemed strange to me (at the time) because back in the day we learned that if you didn't like what was on then get up and change the channel. The OP concludes with a policy I've always taken to heart, my choice is to not patronize those entities that I don't trust. Perhaps the difference is that I never had a problem with Rush or Fox News not catering to my taste.

Rush & Fox don't actively suppress the opinions of the opposite party. In fact they promote those opinions because it gives them fuel for their own positions.

 

[rightwinger]

There are plenty of social media sites around and each one must decide for itself what editoral control they wish to exert. The charge of propaganda control that I'm reading about here isn't all that different from the liberals' bellyaching when Rush Limbaugh first became popular. It seemed strange to me (at the time) because back in the day we learned that if you didn't like what was on then get up and change the channel. The OP concludes with a policy I've always taken to heart, my choice is to not patronize those entities that I don't trust. Perhaps the difference is that I never had a problem with Rush or Fox News not catering to my taste.

Rush & Fox don't actively suppress the opinions of the opposite party. In fact they promote those opinions because it gives them fuel for their own positions.

Neither does Facebook and Twitter

They just point out that this poster is a crazy fucking liar.
Some people are incapable of knowing otherwise

 

[evenflow1969]

Whats the goal here?

Suppress anger from the right befor the runoff senate race?

Force congress to break them up/strip them of protections?

Think they can permanently control public discourse if they just keep the propaganda machine oiled with the fresh remains of the 1st amendment?

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

www.bloomberg.com

Seriously can't say this loud enough....

FUCK THESE COMPANIES!

They will not be stripped of protection adults know thar will have a wider range of effects than just the giant tech companies. Social media will flat disappear if you make them responsible and culpable for what people post on them. Kinda like trying to make gun companies culpable for what the purchaser does. Also privately owned. Can't tell them what to do with their platform.

 

[Lesh]

There are plenty of social media sites around and each one must decide for itself what editoral control they wish to exert. The charge of propaganda control that I'm reading about here isn't all that different from the liberals' bellyaching when Rush Limbaugh first became popular. It seemed strange to me (at the time) because back in the day we learned that if you didn't like what was on then get up and change the channel. The OP concludes with a policy I've always taken to heart, my choice is to not patronize those entities that I don't trust. Perhaps the difference is that I never had a problem with Rush or Fox News not catering to my taste.

Rush & Fox don't actively suppress the opinions of the opposite party. In fact they promote those opinions because it gives them fuel for their own positions.

Neither does Facebook and Twitter

They just point out that this poster is a crazy fucking liar.
Some people are incapable of knowing otherwise

Exactly. Misinformation and outright lies are still misinformation and outright lies regardless of elections

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

There are plenty of social media sites around and each one must decide for itself what editoral control they wish to exert. The charge of propaganda control that I'm reading about here isn't all that different from the liberals' bellyaching when Rush Limbaugh first became popular. It seemed strange to me (at the time) because back in the day we learned that if you didn't like what was on then get up and change the channel. The OP concludes with a policy I've always taken to heart, my choice is to not patronize those entities that I don't trust. Perhaps the difference is that I never had a problem with Rush or Fox News not catering to my taste.

Rush & Fox don't actively suppress the opinions of the opposite party. In fact they promote those opinions because it gives them fuel for their own positions.

Neither does Facebook and Twitter

They just point out that this poster is a crazy fucking liar.
Some people are incapable of knowing otherwise

Exactly. Misinformation and outright lies are still misinformation and outright lies regardless of elections

How absurd. So everytime someone disagrees with your OPINION that makes you a liar? Those are your standards?

Insane

 

[my2¢]

Rush & Fox don't actively suppress the opinions of the opposite party. In fact they promote those opinions because it gives them fuel for their own positions.

Looking for fuel to prop their own positions sure wouldn't give me confidence I'm being providing the best and brightest representation of opposing views.

 

[rightwinger]

There are plenty of social media sites around and each one must decide for itself what editoral control they wish to exert. The charge of propaganda control that I'm reading about here isn't all that different from the liberals' bellyaching when Rush Limbaugh first became popular. It seemed strange to me (at the time) because back in the day we learned that if you didn't like what was on then get up and change the channel. The OP concludes with a policy I've always taken to heart, my choice is to not patronize those entities that I don't trust. Perhaps the difference is that I never had a problem with Rush or Fox News not catering to my taste.

Rush & Fox don't actively suppress the opinions of the opposite party. In fact they promote those opinions because it gives them fuel for their own positions.

Neither does Facebook and Twitter

They just point out that this poster is a crazy fucking liar.
Some people are incapable of knowing otherwise

Exactly. Misinformation and outright lies are still misinformation and outright lies regardless of elections

How absurd. So everytime someone disagrees with your OPINION that makes you a liar? Those are your standards?

Insane

No, lying and spreading false information makes you a liar

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Rush & Fox don't actively suppress the opinions of the opposite party. In fact they promote those opinions because it gives them fuel for their own positions.

Looking for fuel to prop their own positions sure wouldn't give me confidence I'm being providing the best and brightest representation of opposing views.

That's not the point. Let's keep the goalposts firmly planted shall we.

 

[Lesh]

That's not the point. Let's keep the goalposts firmly planted shall we.

Separate fact from opinion and the goal posts are firmly where they belong

 

[bripat9643]

Whats the goal here?

Suppress anger from the right befor the runoff senate race?

Force congress to break them up/strip them of protections?

Think they can permanently control public discourse if they just keep the propaganda machine oiled with the fresh remains of the 1st amendment?

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

www.bloomberg.com

Seriously can't say this loud enough....

FUCK THESE COMPANIES!

Did you seriously believe they were going to stop if that crook Biden won? That just gave them the green light for more of the same.

 

[bripat9643]

Whats the goal here?

Suppress anger from the right befor the runoff senate race?

Force congress to break them up/strip them of protections?

Think they can permanently control public discourse if they just keep the propaganda machine oiled with the fresh remains of the 1st amendment?

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

www.bloomberg.com

Seriously can't say this loud enough....

FUCK THESE COMPANIES!

Fake News deserves to be treated like Fake News

And maybe many of these posts sole purpose is to enrage certain members and encourage violence.

So you agree that they are acting as publishers and not open platforms, thus undeserving of the protections from civil liability afforded to them by the government.

Thank you both for proving my point.

I would remind you that every forum and website everywhere has TOS. I am sure USMB, as well as every other political forum, would take issue with your position.

Do they all have protection from lawsuits under rule 230?

 

[colfax_m]

Whats the goal here?

They don’t want to be a hotbed of conspiratorial nonsense.

 

[bripat9643]

That's not the point. Let's keep the goalposts firmly planted shall we.

Separate fact from opinion and the goal posts are firmly where they belong

When have you ever posted a tangible fact?

 

[bripat9643]

Whats the goal here?

They don’t want to be a hotbed of conspiratorial nonsense.

You mean they want to suppress opinions and information they disagree with.

Who do you think you're fooling?

 

[Lesh]

Whats the goal here?

They don’t want to be a hotbed of conspiratorial nonsense.

You mean they want to suppress opinions and information they disagree with.

Who do you think you're fooling?

Oh look...the troll is back.

 

[colfax_m]

Whats the goal here?

They don’t want to be a hotbed of conspiratorial nonsense.

You mean they want to suppress opinions and information they disagree with.

Who do you think you're fooling?

I mean that they are a business and advertisers don’t like their ads appearing on the pages of lunatics.