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

[bripat9643]

IMO, if you can't treat them like a publisher, they should not be censoring content. They should not receive, for example, protection from liability if a liberal hater doxes a conservative and his children die in a house fire while simultaneously being free to censor that conservative's expression of his views.

You can have that opinion but that leads to unintended consequences.

See, what you’re suggesting is exactly what we had back in the day, in the 1990s. There would be forums and they would be moderated so when objectionable content gets posted, they’d take it down. Well, the courts then made them liable for everything posted on their sites. So either you’d have to leave up everything on the website no matter how objectionable, or be responsible for the content of every person.

And that was not a situation that could be sustained.

It could not be "sustained" only if Dim douchebags wanted to retain power. They can't tolerate people speaking the truth.

 

[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?

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

There are plenty of advertisers what would love to have their ads posted on rightwing pages.

You idiots kill me when you display your naked hatred for freedom of speech.

Why do you call yourselves "liberal" or "progressive?" Stalinists is what you are.

Not enough to pay the bills for the torrent of bullshit you lunatics put in the internet.

We are talking about massive companies, not stupid little right wing blogs.

The hatred of freedom comes from you thugs who demand social media do as you say.

Yeah, right. Censorship means freedom. War is peace.

Freedom of speech costs nothing. Censorship is what requires massive armies of Stalinist douchebags.

You're the lowest bucket of piss in the universe.

But you’re forgetting that this “censorship” isn’t occurring in the public sphere. It’s not occurring on government property.

It’s occurring on private servers paid for by private money. You are a thug trying to tell people what to do with their property. Because you know what? Running a massive website isn’t actually free!

It's occuring with government protection, scumbag. The cost of lawyers isn't free when the government isn't protecting you from lawsuits.

No one needs government to protect them from the consequences of chucking you lunatics off their property. That’s their constitutional right to do so.

The you should support terminating Section 230. Why are you fighting so hard to defend it?

Because the internet would be a steaming pile of shit without it.

You lunatics would burn it all down.

YEs, I imagine from the point of view of a bootlicking Stalinist dirtbag, it would be a pile of shit. However, now it's a pile of shit for anyone who isn't a brainwashed minion of the deep state.

 

[B. Kidd]

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?

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

FUCK THESE COMPANIES!

Permanent control. It's the Commie way!

 

[colfax_m]

IMO, if you can't treat them like a publisher, they should not be censoring content. They should not receive, for example, protection from liability if a liberal hater doxes a conservative and his children die in a house fire while simultaneously being free to censor that conservative's expression of his views.

You can have that opinion but that leads to unintended consequences.

See, what you’re suggesting is exactly what we had back in the day, in the 1990s. There would be forums and they would be moderated so when objectionable content gets posted, they’d take it down. Well, the courts then made them liable for everything posted on their sites. So either you’d have to leave up everything on the website no matter how objectionable, or be responsible for the content of every person.

And that was not a situation that could be sustained.

It's not an ideal world and compromises must be made. I understand that.

I’d rather a few

IMO, if you can't treat them like a publisher, they should not be censoring content. They should not receive, for example, protection from liability if a liberal hater doxes a conservative and his children die in a house fire while simultaneously being free to censor that conservative's expression of his views.

You can have that opinion but that leads to unintended consequences.

See, what you’re suggesting is exactly what we had back in the day, in the 1990s. There would be forums and they would be moderated so when objectionable content gets posted, they’d take it down. Well, the courts then made them liable for everything posted on their sites. So either you’d have to leave up everything on the website no matter how objectionable, or be responsible for the content of every person.

And that was not a situation that could be sustained.

It could not be "sustained" only if Dim douchebags wanted to retain power. They can't tolerate people speaking the truth.

The truth is you are a bunch of thugs with no respect for private property.

Stand on a street corner and spout your nonsense. You have my full support. Demand that someone do it for you, then go to hell.

 

[dblack]

The main thing is, government should be in charge, not private companies. Government should decide for us what news is real and what news isn't. Because they know best.

 

[Zorro!]

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?

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

FUCK THESE COMPANIES!

It's about the ability of those in power to abuse others:

WE TAKE HARASSMENT SUPER SERIOUSLY AROUND HERE, FELLAS. A student re-attached a fallen note of support to a staff member’s door. Then her university investigated her for harassment.

Weird, it’s like unmooring harassment from any reasonable definition of the term turned out to be a tool for those in power to abuse the plebs.

FROSTBURG, Md., Dec. 14, 2020 — How far will a university administration go to retaliate for bad press? At Frostburg State University, the answer is chilling.

The Censorious Retaliatory spirit of Social Media was fostered in our universities before being loosed on society by social media.

Student reporter Cassie Conklin must have ruffled some administrative feathers for covering criticism of the Maryland university’s COVID-19 response for the student newspaper. After video showed her re-attaching a fallen note to a staff member’s door during a campus protest, she found herself the target of a baseless harassment investigation by the administration, and the newspaper found itself facing university demands to investigate and punish its own reporter.

“The realization that the president of Frostburg State University, a school that I deeply love and respect, chose to personally target and retaliate against me for my journalistic efforts has been overwhelming, confusing, and hurtful,” Conklin said.​

Today, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education and the Student Press Law Center call on FSU President Ronald Nowaczyk to immediately end the investigation into Conklin without punishment and make clear that The Bottom Line, the university’s independent student newspaper, is not required to comply with any administrative directives.

Fishy timing

The timing of FSU’s actions against Conklin smells off. On Oct. 21, Conklin covered student protests against a staff member, during which time she took photographs of the staff member’s door. On Oct. 30, Conklin wrote an unrelated story detailing a student’s ordeal after testing positive for coronavirus, alleging that the university did little to help the student despite knowing she lived in campus dorms.

On Friday, Nov. 20, The Baltimore Sun linked to Conklin’s coronavirus story. On Monday, Nov. 23, administrators summoned Conklin’s editor-in-chief and the newspaper’s faculty adviser for a meeting to discuss Conklin allegedly harassing a university staff member an entire month prior.

Administrators accused Conklin of slipping a threatening note under the door of the staff member who was the subject of the student demonstrations and Conklin’s Oct. 21 story. The university said they had video evidence to prove the allegations (the video actually proves Conklin’s innocence), and directed the newspaper to investigate and punish Conklin.

One day later, the vice president for student affairs summoned Conklin to a meeting and said that the president’s office helped initiate the investigation “because of [Conlkin’s] role with the newspaper.” She was told she would be investigated not only as a student, but also as an employee of the newspaper because she received a $75 stipend during the semester.

FSU could not explain why it waited 33 days to initiate the investigation. Moreover, the investigation was actually initiated the next business day after her report on coronavirus in the dorms gained mass media attention. (Meanwhile, FSU was threatening its resident assistants — who spoke to The Bottom Line and to The Washington Post — that they could be subject to an “attitude” adjustment in their employee evaluations if they “bad mouth” the university in public.)

“The fact that the university waited an entire month to act on a complaint calls into question whether the university was concerned by her alleged behavior — or by her growing portfolio of reporting critical of the university,” said FIRE’s Lindsie Rank, author of the letter to FSU. “If FSU was concerned that Conklin actually harassed a staff member, waiting a month likely would violate its obligations to ensure the safety of its students and staff.”

Then, without evidence, the case fell apart

The video — which Conklin was finally allowed to view and share with FIRE on Dec. 10 — doesn’t back up FSU’s version of the facts.

The note Cassie Conklin re-attached to a staff member's door.​

Instead, the tape shows a note fall from the staff member’s door into an empty hallway. Conklin, reporting on a protest against the staff member, picks up the note and re-sticks it to the door moments later. What’s more, the note, which Conklin photographed but did not author, expresses support for the staff member.

On Nov. 30, the university confirmed to Conklin that there was no evidence that she violated FSU’s student code of conduct, and that she will not be punished as a student.

One down, one to go

However, FSU’s administration has given no indication that it abandoned the employee investigation into Conklin, and Nowaczyk has not rescinded his demand that The Bottom Line punish Conklin. FIRE and SPLC’s letter reminds FSU of students’ rights under the First Amendment, the threshold to meet “harassment,” how investigations alone constitute retaliation, and why the university cannot punish Conklin as a student or as an employee.

“I feel tricked,” Conklin said. “FSU touts itself as a place that educates the leaders of tomorrow, those who will go forward equipped with a moral compass and critical thinking skills. However, when I used those talents to hold FSU accountable for their decisions, rather than improving and growing, President Nowaczyk has decided to attack the messenger.”​

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to defending and sustaining the individual rights of students and faculty members at America’s colleges and universities. These rights include freedom of speech, freedom of association, due process, legal equality, religious liberty, and sanctity of conscience — the essential qualities of liberty.

This is the vile evil that Social Media wants to blanket the nation with.

 

[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.

There are plenty of advertisers what would love to have their ads posted on rightwing pages.

You idiots kill me when you display your naked hatred for freedom of speech.

Why do you call yourselves "liberal" or "progressive?" Stalinists is what you are.

Not enough to pay the bills for the torrent of bullshit you lunatics put in the internet.

We are talking about massive companies, not stupid little right wing blogs.

The hatred of freedom comes from you thugs who demand social media do as you say.

Yeah, right. Censorship means freedom. War is peace.

Freedom of speech costs nothing. Censorship is what requires massive armies of Stalinist douchebags.

You're the lowest bucket of piss in the universe.

But you’re forgetting that this “censorship” isn’t occurring in the public sphere. It’s not occurring on government property.

It’s occurring on private servers paid for by private money. You are a thug trying to tell people what to do with their property. Because you know what? Running a massive website isn’t actually free!

It's occuring with government protection, scumbag. The cost of lawyers isn't free when the government isn't protecting you from lawsuits.

No one needs government to protect them from the consequences of chucking you lunatics off their property. That’s their constitutional right to do so.

The you should support terminating Section 230. Why are you fighting so hard to defend it?

Because the internet would be a steaming pile of shit without it.

You lunatics would burn it all down.

YEs, I imagine from the point of view of a bootlicking Stalinist dirtbag, it would be a pile of shit. However, now it's a pile of shit for anyone who isn't a brainwashed minion of the deep state.

The Stalinist is the one who wants to force private individuals to do to your bidding.

 

[Richard-H]

When is Google gonna take down all the angry Karen videos? BLM videos advocating violence? Music videos that brag about raping women & killing cops?
Videos of celebrities making wild claims & threats? Women sexualizing themselves for money in the name of art? Graphic videos of people fighting or worse? Etc...

Instead they focus on conservative opinion videos...

It's CLEAR to me we have our priorities completely backwards.

Because none of what you listed is as potentially damaging as the lying conservative opinion videos are to weak minds like yours!

 

[Wyatt earp]

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, everytime someone lies to me it makes them a liar and when they find that insane then there is something odd about them.

How do you know they lied?

 

[hadit]

IMO, if you can't treat them like a publisher, they should not be censoring content. They should not receive, for example, protection from liability if a liberal hater doxes a conservative and his children die in a house fire while simultaneously being free to censor that conservative's expression of his views.

You can have that opinion but that leads to unintended consequences.

See, what you’re suggesting is exactly what we had back in the day, in the 1990s. There would be forums and they would be moderated so when objectionable content gets posted, they’d take it down. Well, the courts then made them liable for everything posted on their sites. So either you’d have to leave up everything on the website no matter how objectionable, or be responsible for the content of every person.

And that was not a situation that could be sustained.

It's not an ideal world and compromises must be made. I understand that.

I’d rather a few

IMO, if you can't treat them like a publisher, they should not be censoring content. They should not receive, for example, protection from liability if a liberal hater doxes a conservative and his children die in a house fire while simultaneously being free to censor that conservative's expression of his views.

You can have that opinion but that leads to unintended consequences.

See, what you’re suggesting is exactly what we had back in the day, in the 1990s. There would be forums and they would be moderated so when objectionable content gets posted, they’d take it down. Well, the courts then made them liable for everything posted on their sites. So either you’d have to leave up everything on the website no matter how objectionable, or be responsible for the content of every person.

And that was not a situation that could be sustained.

It could not be "sustained" only if Dim douchebags wanted to retain power. They can't tolerate people speaking the truth.

The truth is you are a bunch of thugs with no respect for private property.

Stand on a street corner and spout your nonsense. You have my full support. Demand that someone do it for you, then go to hell.

Public accommodation laws really need to be worked out with regards to social media. It is not right that a person can be denied access to a publicly offered service based on the opinions he/she expresses.

 

[Wyatt earp]

When is Google gonna take down all the angry Karen videos? BLM videos advocating violence? Music videos that brag about raping women & killing cops?
Videos of celebrities making wild claims & threats? Women sexualizing themselves for money in the name of art? Graphic videos of people fighting or worse? Etc...

Instead they focus on conservative opinion videos...

It's CLEAR to me we have our priorities completely backwards.

Because none of what you listed is as potentially damaging as the lying conservative opinion videos are to weak minds like yours!

Once again how did the hated Trump get more votes then the beloved Obama when liberals abort a half a million babies a year?

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Feel grateful for the freedoms we still enjoy.

Our children will not have these freedoms.

Our grandchildren will not know these freedoms ever existed.

Unfortunately, the ones who voted for this travesty will get their bondage. The useful idiots will be ground up also.

 

[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?

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

There are plenty of advertisers what would love to have their ads posted on rightwing pages.

You idiots kill me when you display your naked hatred for freedom of speech.

Why do you call yourselves "liberal" or "progressive?" Stalinists is what you are.

Not enough to pay the bills for the torrent of bullshit you lunatics put in the internet.

We are talking about massive companies, not stupid little right wing blogs.

The hatred of freedom comes from you thugs who demand social media do as you say.

Yeah, right. Censorship means freedom. War is peace.

Freedom of speech costs nothing. Censorship is what requires massive armies of Stalinist douchebags.

You're the lowest bucket of piss in the universe.

But you’re forgetting that this “censorship” isn’t occurring in the public sphere. It’s not occurring on government property.

It’s occurring on private servers paid for by private money. You are a thug trying to tell people what to do with their property. Because you know what? Running a massive website isn’t actually free!

It's occuring with government protection, scumbag. The cost of lawyers isn't free when the government isn't protecting you from lawsuits.

No one needs government to protect them from the consequences of chucking you lunatics off their property. That’s their constitutional right to do so.

The you should support terminating Section 230. Why are you fighting so hard to defend it?

Because the internet would be a steaming pile of shit without it.

You lunatics would burn it all down.

YEs, I imagine from the point of view of a bootlicking Stalinist dirtbag, it would be a pile of shit. However, now it's a pile of shit for anyone who isn't a brainwashed minion of the deep state.

The Stalinist is the one who wants to force private individuals to do to your bidding.

I have no intention of forcing them to do my bidding. I just don't want them protected from lawsuits while they persecute half the population of this country.

 

[bripat9643]

When is Google gonna take down all the angry Karen videos? BLM videos advocating violence? Music videos that brag about raping women & killing cops?
Videos of celebrities making wild claims & threats? Women sexualizing themselves for money in the name of art? Graphic videos of people fighting or worse? Etc...

Instead they focus on conservative opinion videos...

It's CLEAR to me we have our priorities completely backwards.

Because none of what you listed is as potentially damaging as the lying conservative opinion videos are to weak minds like yours!

I'm sure they damage every leftwing turd in office.

 

[rightwinger]

When is Google gonna take down all the angry Karen videos? BLM videos advocating violence? Music videos that brag about raping women & killing cops?
Videos of celebrities making wild claims & threats? Women sexualizing themselves for money in the name of art? Graphic videos of people fighting or worse? Etc...

Instead they focus on conservative opinion videos...

It's CLEAR to me we have our priorities completely backwards.

Because none of what you listed is as potentially damaging as the lying conservative opinion videos are to weak minds like yours!

Once again how did the hated Trump get more votes then the beloved Obama when liberals abort a half a million babies a year?

The Great Obama actually WON the popular vote
Something Fat Donnie can never claim

 

[Slade3200]

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?

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

FUCK THESE COMPANIES!

Jesus... then don’t use them!! If they don’t want porn on their sites then thats their call. If they don’t want beheadings on their sites then fine. If they don’t want people posting fake/misleading videos that undermine an election then that is also their call. Don’t like it? Then go somewhere else. I’m sure trumps site will be up in a couple months. You can slurp up all the lies that you want there.

 

[hadit]

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?

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

FUCK THESE COMPANIES!

Jesus... then don’t use them!! If they don’t want porn on their sites then thats their call. If they don’t want beheadings on their sites then fine. If they don’t want people posting fake/misleading videos that undermine an election then that is also their call. Don’t like it? Then go somewhere else. I’m sure trumps site will be up in a couple months. You can slurp up all the lies that you want there.

Man, that sounds awfully familiar. They are the same arguments supporters of those bakers used when they were shouted at about public accommodation.

 

[dblack]

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.

There are plenty of advertisers what would love to have their ads posted on rightwing pages.

You idiots kill me when you display your naked hatred for freedom of speech.

Why do you call yourselves "liberal" or "progressive?" Stalinists is what you are.

Not enough to pay the bills for the torrent of bullshit you lunatics put in the internet.

We are talking about massive companies, not stupid little right wing blogs.

The hatred of freedom comes from you thugs who demand social media do as you say.

Yeah, right. Censorship means freedom. War is peace.

Freedom of speech costs nothing. Censorship is what requires massive armies of Stalinist douchebags.

You're the lowest bucket of piss in the universe.

But you’re forgetting that this “censorship” isn’t occurring in the public sphere. It’s not occurring on government property.

It’s occurring on private servers paid for by private money. You are a thug trying to tell people what to do with their property. Because you know what? Running a massive website isn’t actually free!

It's occuring with government protection, scumbag. The cost of lawyers isn't free when the government isn't protecting you from lawsuits.

No one needs government to protect them from the consequences of chucking you lunatics off their property. That’s their constitutional right to do so.

The you should support terminating Section 230. Why are you fighting so hard to defend it?

Because the internet would be a steaming pile of shit without it.

You lunatics would burn it all down.

YEs, I imagine from the point of view of a bootlicking Stalinist dirtbag, it would be a pile of shit. However, now it's a pile of shit for anyone who isn't a brainwashed minion of the deep state.

The Stalinist is the one who wants to force private individuals to do to your bidding.

I have no intention of forcing them to do my bidding. I just don't want them protected from lawsuits while they persecute half the population of this country.

That argument is completely fake. You all are pissed off at Facebook and Twitter because they're flagging your posts for the bullshit they are, and you want big daddy government to punish them. Same old statist crap - using the government to bully people you don't like.

But, I know, it's different when you do it.

 

[Skylar]

I'm guessing when those posts stop violating their TOS.

 

[dblack]

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?

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

FUCK THESE COMPANIES!

Jesus... then don’t use them!! If they don’t want porn on their sites then thats their call. If they don’t want beheadings on their sites then fine. If they don’t want people posting fake/misleading videos that undermine an election then that is also their call. Don’t like it? Then go somewhere else. I’m sure trumps site will be up in a couple months. You can slurp up all the lies that you want there.

Man, that sounds awfully familiar. They are the same arguments supporters of those bakers used when they were shouted at about public accommodation.

Exactly the same arguments. Flaming hypocrites on both sides. With the exception of tiny handful of genuine libertarians, pretty much everyone sees the government as a way to get one over on the other guy.