Censorship continued: first the Parler app then @realDonaldTrump

[I Shrugged]

“With no explanation other than ‘repeatedly going against our community standards,’ @Facebook has blocked me from managing my page. Never have we received notice of violating community standards in the past and nowhere is the offending post identified,” Paul tweeted.

His most recent post linked to an article he wrote denouncing “shocking and chilling” censorship on social media.

[glennds]

Add Angela Merkel to the list of those concerned with Twitter's censoring:

https://www.thelocal.de/20210111/merkel ... roblematic

or

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/0 ... oblematic/

[I Shrugged]

This stuff plus the impeachment plus whatever comes next is going to backfire in a big way.

[Mark Leavy]

Yes, but it's confusing for me when Mark doesn't seem to fear handing full control of our policing and legal system to private corporations,

yada yada yada

And one more thing

I wish you would lay off of this ridiculous characterization.

I’m assuming that you are referencing a discussion I had with tech.

He proposed using title insurance as a way to secure private property. I was intrigued by the idea and mused how it could be done. I came down on the side that it would be practical if the title companies hired private security in the same manner as has been proven and widely implemented in other industries.

You jumped to me advocating that proposition.

Please stop. Seriously. Embrace ‘what if’s’

[SomeDude]

Add Angela Merkel to the list of those concerned with Twitter's censoring:

https://www.thelocal.de/20210111/merkel ... roblematic

or

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/0 ... oblematic/

Lol

She just thinks she should get to decide who gets to speak, not a company.

Germany does not have freedom of speech. You can get arrested for certain beliefs there if you express them.

[pp4me]

It just seems like Libertarians here decry government oversight and involvement in private enterprise, but then when private entities behave like this they act shocked and outraged....I'm confused

Yes you are.

Said private entities can do as they like but that doesn't mean libertarians aren't allowed to be shocked and outraged by it.

(I guess it's pick on Doodle day)

[vnatale]

It just seems like Libertarians here decry government oversight and involvement in private enterprise, but then when private entities behave like this they act shocked and outraged....I'm confused

Yes you are.

Said private entities can do as they like but that doesn't mean libertarians aren't allowed to be shocked and outraged by it.

(I guess it's pick on Doodle day)

However, what comes across to both Doodle and myself (if I am correctly interpreting him) is that this outrage seems to imply that something should be done about it?

What are these things that can be done about it?

Either some government involvement or the private world rising up to provide what the marketplace desires.

We know that the libertarians never want the government solution so we end up confused why other private entities cannot just step up and provide a solution. All I keep hearing is that 73,000.000 people have lost their voices.

I am shocked that no private companies have been in place to immediately swoop down and take advantage of this 73,000,000 person market place just ready to be captured.

Is this not one of those things that could have been well foreseen? The genius of highly competent entrepreneurship is the ability to quickly take care of a marketplace need.

[Mark Leavy]

So what are the rules?

If I put a billion into re-creating the infrastructure needed for open discussion, is that enough?

Or do I also need to create a banking system - because (reasons).

What about employment for anyone that uses my new infrastructure? Are all of those folks going to be out of work?

Does my business only need to hire folks that don't need to fly? If you use my service, will you not be able to fly?

It's tough to put together a business plan right now.

[pp4me]

It just seems like Libertarians here decry government oversight and involvement in private enterprise, but then when private entities behave like this they act shocked and outraged....I'm confused

Yes you are.

Said private entities can do as they like but that doesn't mean libertarians aren't allowed to be shocked and outraged by it.

(I guess it's pick on Doodle day)

However, what comes across to both Doodle and myself (if I am correctly interpreting him) is that this outrage seems to imply that something should be done about it?

What are these things that can be done about it?

Either some government involvement or the private world rising up to provide what the marketplace desires.

We know that the libertarians never want the government solution so we end up confused why other private entities cannot just step up and provide a solution. All I keep hearing is that 73,000.000 people have lost their voices.

I am shocked that no private companies have been in place to immediately swoop down and take advantage of this 73,000,000 person market place just ready to be captured.

Is this not one of those things that could have been well foreseen? The genius of highly competent entrepreneurship is the ability to quickly take care of a marketplace need.

I haven't read the whole thread but did anybody actually say that the government should do something about it? If not, then how do you know that is what they are thinking?

I agree that conservatives should start competing with the giant tech companies. I expect to see more of it in the future. A lot of them did see it coming and have things in the works.

[InsuranceGuy]

[deleted]

[vnatale]

Vinny, there are several alternatives to Twatter: Parler and Gab. But these companies keep getting undermined by Big Tech and, so far, the government has done nothing to stop this clear violation of anti-trust laws.

1) I am not seeing a "clear violation".
2) Trump still has an entire Justice Department which he seemingly controls and directs. Why isn't he on this?

So what are the rules?

If I put a billion into re-creating the infrastructure needed for open discussion, is that enough?

Or do I also need to create a banking system - because (reasons).

What about employment for anyone that uses my new infrastructure? Are all of those folks going to be out of work?

Does my business only need to hire folks that don't need to fly? If you use my service, will you not be able to fly?

It's tough to put together a business plan right now.

You raise some excellent questions.

However, don't excellent entrepreneurial companies have things in place to deal with all of this? It just should not have been a shock to all of them that all of this could happen.

I think the biggest shock to all is that Trump could have continued to go off an even deeper end than he had in his nearly four years prior. His after election antics have lost him many supporters, even fellow Trump compliant Republican office holders.

I haven't read the whole thread but did anybody actually say that the government should do something about it? If not, then how do you know that is what they are thinking?

I agree that conservatives should start competing with the giant tech companies. I expect to see more of it in the future. A lot of them did see it coming and have things in the works.

At the time I wrote what I wrote I had clearly stated that my assumption was that libertarians would not be advocating for any government involvement. But after I wrote that I did get a response from MangoMan stating his believe that the government should get involved.

[SomeDude]

The greatest triumphs of propaganda have been accomplished, not by doing something, but by refraining from doing. Great is truth, but still greater, from a practical point of view, is silence about truth. By simply not mentioning certain subjects, by lowering what Mr. Churchill calls an "iron curtain" between the masses and such facts or arguments as the local political bosses regard as undesirable, totalitarian propagandists have influenced opinion much more effectively than they could have done by the most eloquent denunciations, the most compelling of logical rebuttals.
Aldous Huxley

Simon.........

All I can say is thank goodness it was PRIVATE companies that all at once banned communication from the side pointing out massive election fraud. It would be really bad if this came from the incoming illegitimate government that seized power with voting machines switching votes, miscounting them, tens of thousands of fake ballots that only had Biden's name on them, people pulling out suitcases and running the votes through machines in the middle of the night with no observers, 1,000+ affidavits, basically sworn testimony of fraud they witnessed or took part in, driving thousands of filled out ballots across state lines, back dating ballot envelopes on orders of postal and election supervisors, counting for more than a week in some instances, kicking out republican poll watchers and cheering when they were out of the buildings, boarding up windows to prevent observation even after court orders told them to open up, Biden getting 15M+ more votes than Barrack or Hillary despite being extremely unpopular and not campaigning and a red wave dominating the down ballots across the country, Trump picking up 12M more votes legitimately, nearly all in-person from 2016 and winning 18/19 bellwether counties and Iowa, Ohio, and FL.

Thank Goodness it's PRIVATE companies banning discussion of any of this and memory-holing it to protect the incoming illegitimate government. If the illegitimate government was the one doing it we'd all see what tyranny we were under and it would be awful. We'd really be screwed then lol.

Remember, they had to ban all discussion on their platforms of what happened in the election because otherwise the criminal gang assuming power would have had to and that would be bad.

[I Shrugged]

Here is Glenn Greenwald's column today, giving some background about Parler, and laying out the story. Great as usual, and he lays out the case that current leftists are nothing more than political authoritarians. (Which is ironic because all they did was bleat that Trump was a fascist.)

https://greenwald.substack.com/p/how-si ... nopolistic

Critics of Silicon Valley censorship for years heard the same refrain: tech platforms like Facebook, Google and Twitter are private corporations and can host or ban whoever they want. If you don’t like what they are doing, the solution is not to complain or to regulate them. Instead, go create your own social media platform that operates the way you think it should.

The founders of Parler heard that suggestion and tried.

That is because the dominant strain of American liberalism is not economic socialism but political authoritarianism. Liberals now want to use the force of corporate power to silence those with different ideologies. They are eager for tech monopolies not just to ban accounts they dislike but to remove entire platforms from the internet. They want to imprison people they believe helped their party lose elections, such as Julian Assange, even if it means creating precedents to criminalize journalism.

Yet American liberals swoon for this authoritarianism. And they are now calling for the use of the most repressive War on Terror measures against their domestic opponents. On Tuesday, House Homeland Security Chair Bennie Thompson (D-MS) urged that GOP Sens. Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley “be put on the no-fly list,” while The Wall Street Journal reported that “Biden has said he plans to make a priority of passing a law against domestic terrorism, and he has been urged to create a White House post overseeing the fight against ideologically inspired violent extremists and increasing funding to combat them.”

Indeed, a Parler executive told me that of the thirteen people arrested as of Monday for the breach at the Capitol, none appear to be active users of Parler. The Capitol breach was planned far more on Facebook and YouTube.

No authoritarians believe they are authoritarians. No matter how repressive are the measures they support — censorship, monopoly power, no-fly lists for American citizens without due process — they tell themselves that those they are silencing and attacking are so evil, are terrorists, that anything done against them is noble and benevolent, not despotic and repressive. That is how American liberals currently think, as they fortify the control of Silicon Valley monopolies over our political lives, exemplified by the overnight destruction of a new and popular competitor.

And, so we are clear here, are any of you (doodle, Vinny) in favor of what's been done to Parler? Or are you just enjoying it because it hurts people you oppose? This is discussed in the article. Please elaborate.

[Cortopassi]

FYI, this is obviously a political discussion and you guys have sent me down the rabbit hole. Xan, can you move this to politics (only if you feel I am correct).

And since I am here:

1) All these big tech companies have terms of service. I assume they are pretty well covered. I am sure 10s/100s of people a day get banned for whatever reasons, and you don't hear about it. I am not sure I agree with the move, just stating what I believe are facts.

2) Trump can have 14 press conferences a day. He isn't completely silenced, he's just silenced back to 1990's level. In fact, right now, with whatever 8 days left and what's been going on, EVERY single news outlet would cover a press conference if Trump called one daily.

3) The 73MM people should boycott these companies to the extent possible if they choose. Obviously, somewhat difficult.

[vnatale]

And, so we are clear here, are any of you (doodle, Vinny) in favor of what's been done to Parler? Or are you just enjoying it because it hurts people you oppose? This is discussed in the article. Please elaborate.

My reaction is to have no pity for Parler.

I am extremely dependent on computers and all the information I've created. Therefore I own both a lot of computers and a lot external hard drives to preserve my access to both computers and my precious information. For anything else in life that I'm heavily dependent on I generally have more than one so that I'm not going to be stuck.

Parler seems to have not set up no backups for themselves in spite of what has happened to them being far from a remote probability. This is corporate negligence of the highest order.

I've detailed how both Facebook and Twitters have routinely shut me down because of my behavior and how I had to learn the proper behavior so that I would not get "Parler'ed" by either or both of them. They have their rules and if you want to use their free services then you must abide by their rules. Does not matter if you are just a single person like myself or some entity such as parler.com.

The prevailing sentiment in this forum has its usual conspiratorial undertones to it. That all these private corporations are acting in concert with one another.

Another thing I find amusing is that there is so much reviling of the government here with one of the reasons cited is that the government thinks that know what is best for everyone.

From what I've gathered here there do not seem to be any active users of Facebook or Twitter besides me? Yet many are fine with opining what should happen to Facebook and Twitter? Seems to be a somewhat "big government" mentality to me.

Finally, here is a major piece that all who know best seem to be missing precisely because they do seem to know little about either Facebook or Twitter or both.

Facebook and Twitter are in direct competition with one another.

If I'm deciding to spend some time on social media, they are my main two choices.

Sometimes it will be all Facebook. Sometimes it will be all Twitter. Sometimes it will be actively going back and forth (particularly when I'm putting things I find on Twitter to my Facebook page).

But these two social media giants are in direct competition with one another. If each had the power to mandate and control my behavior they'd not allow me to spend ANY time with the other. They want ALL of me. They do not want a shared me.

Therefore, for you conspiracy believers out there....what is in it for each of these companies to conspire with one another on this? How does it help them get more attention than their other main competitor?

I believe I'm continually told here that this country is more conservative than it is liberal.

If that is true, then why did either Twitter or Facebook not seize the competitive advantage of not catering to the liberal perspective but, instead, catering to the conservative perspective?

Does anyone doubt the that main purpose of both Twitter and Facebook is the same as any other mega-corporation -- to earn the maximum profits possible?

Therefore, I can only believe that Twitter / Facebook / Amazon each made their own individual decisions based upon some combination of how it would affect their bottom line and their corporate revulsions of how they've been played and used by Trump to assist him in so many of his vile "accomplishments".

[I Shrugged]

Did you read the article, Vinny?

The answers to your questions are laid out there.

[doodle]

From my understanding Parler had service contracts....I'm sure there is some remedy for severance. I'm just confused because I don't understand what solution Libertarians would like to implement that wouldn't involve government intervention. Am I happy with the power that these tech corporations and our media wield? Absolutely not. Would I like to see regulation? Probably, but that is immediately dismissed here as communistic overreach and a limitation on free speech and private action...so I'm not sure how to react. What do Libertarians suggest other than to abandon the platforms and establish new ones?

lCxkB7fBamkheBk6_-pcpCc8JD-d5clYurklUR6Bw30.jpg (20.93 KiB) Viewed 5371 times

I think Trump brings up a good point...what's the difference between a patriot and a terrorist?

r1oelhdzvla61.png (949.08 KiB) Viewed 5371 times

[vnatale]

Did you read the article, Vinny?

The answers to your questions are laid out there.

I had initially made my comments based upon the long excerpt provided here from the article.

I have now read the article.

I've several times complained here about what an extreme avaricious company Apple is with the way they have planned obsolescence built into their products in the way they handle existing apps no being able to work on devices with "outdated" operating systems. I've not received any sympathy from anyone here. How do I interpret that in any other way than tacit approval of Apple's practices?

If you have made the choice to make the Apple world your only method of connecting to the internet then you have bought into and support this behavior on their part. And, probably, their other behaviors.

They do make wonderful products. But if they behave in such a way antithetical to how you say you believe but you still shovel them tons of $$$$$ for their products....then, in the end. you support their behavior with your $$$$.

I still have to come down on Parler being guilty of gross negligence of duty of the highest order.

The overriding need of any individual or entity is survival. They should have had plans in place to survive under the worst conditions. It appears that they had none.

That the major corporations may now be doing things to cater to a full Democratic government (aside from the Supreme Court -- still fully controlled by the Republicans)....cannot be denied.

But it also cannot be denied that they were doing the same -- catering to a Republican government -- at a time when the Republicans controlled all four branches of government (and, until just recently, still controlled three of them) plus had a President who exhibited unprecedented control over the Justice side of the government. That explains why they let Trump get away for so long with what he did. They were plan afraid of retaliation from a Trump controlled government...from top to bottom. Their was no one of integrity in this top to bottom controlled government.

I am not in favor of Parler.com being banned in any way. I wasted too much time a few days ago trying to log into my account with them. But I do not see them taking any responsibility for the position they currently find themselves in. Again...another familiar conservative / Republican / Trumpist response. Accept no responsibility.

[pp4me]

At the time I wrote what I wrote I had clearly stated that my assumption was that libertarians would not be advocating for any government involvement. But after I wrote that I did get a response from MangoMan stating his believe that the government should get involved.

Depends on what is meant by getting involved.

I don't know too much about it but I understand that the big tech companies were given some special exemptions in regards to legal liability. If the rationale for doing that was because it was in the public interest to create platforms allowing the free exchange of ideas and information then it appears to me that this rationale no longer exists so those exemptions should be repealed.

If they want to practice censorship and turn their platforms into safe spaces for liberals then I think that is a very bad business decision but it's their company and they can do what they want with it, as most people here seem to agree. If they are going to actively work to thwart the development of an un-censored internet then it sure looks to me like this is moving into anti-trust territory.

[I Shrugged]

doodle, you've got your own anti-libertarian trolling agenda that just won't let you talk about anything without trying to argue those points. If you think these corporations all did this independent of each other and of communication with government people, you're blind.

Apart from any government influence, the hypocrisies in the case of the enforcement of terms of service of the various companies are enormous. Further, I haven't promoted any government solution, and I'm not sure anyone here has. That's not to say I do or don't. It hasn't come up and I haven't even thought about it. I'm just asking if the situation worries you and how much? Or does it sit well with you because the the right people have been affected?

Vinny, let's stipulate that Parler could have done things better, and they naively left themselves somewhat defenseless. Is anyone who leaves themselves defenseless to blame for whatever happens to them? No sympathy from you, huh? I don't want to live in that kind of society. Do the actions taken against them worry you, or not? Do you support those actions, or not? Those are the simple questions that define this.

Regardless of what libertarians think, these issues are going to shape 21st century America. I think there is some serious big picture blindness going on right now.

[vnatale]

doodle, you've got your own anti-libertarian trolling agenda that just won't let you talk about anything without trying to argue those points. If you think these corporations all did this independent of each other and of communication with government people, you're blind.

Apart from any government influence, the hypocrisies in the case of the enforcement of terms of service of the various companies are enormous. Further, I haven't promoted any government solution, and I'm not sure anyone here has. That's not to say I do or don't. It hasn't come up and I haven't even thought about it. I'm just asking if the situation worries you and how much? Or does it sit well with you because the the right people have been affected?

Vinny, let's stipulate that Parler could have done things better, and they naively left themselves somewhat defenseless. Is anyone who leaves themselves defenseless to blame for whatever happens to them? No sympathy from you, huh? I don't want to live in that kind of society. Do the actions taken against them worry you, or not? Do you support those actions, or not? Those are the simple questions that define this.

Regardless of what libertarians think, these issues are going to shape 21st century America. I think there is some serious big picture blindness going on right now.

I have already stated the actions of Facebook and Twitter when they've each suspended me repeatedly directly affected me. I was not defenseless. I was to blame. I broke their rules.

I get my TV through DirecTV and internet / phone through a cable company. How much control do I have over their rules they impose upon me?

I learn to adapt to each of their rules to get as much as I can from all mega-corporations without risking losing their services.

Yes, I have no sympathy for profit making corporations that do not take proper measures to protect their corporations from any kind of threats to their survival, whether it be what we are currently witnessing or some form of cyber warfare. They are not defenseless. It is again playing the victim to call them defenseless.

Finally, if this has been some grand collusion / conspiracy among all the giants - Apple / Twitter / Facebook / Amazon / Google ....why have I not yet read from anyone why somehow Microsoft is seemingly missing in action in this conspiracy? What is their reason for being asked to join it but declining to do so? They are truly one of the giants with their installed operating system base and their browser Edge. Have they done anything to control the conservatives? If not, why not?

I have not kept track of where your Trump sympathies have been. But if you have been a Trump supporter then I have to direct your own questions back to you: "Is anyone who leaves themselves defenseless to blame for whatever happens to them? No sympathy from you, huh? I don't want to live in that kind of society."

The Trump society was clearly not one to look out for the common person or the downtrodden.

[doodle]

a3187dac155f.jpg

What about Big Ag, Big Oil, Big Media? Do they exhibit negative influence on society as well through lobbying efforts or squashing competition? What's to be done?

[vnatale]

a3187dac155f.jpg

1) Again..it's not a 1st Amendment, Free Speech issue. That refers to government restriction of speech

2) Can you go into a restaurant (one of your favorite Chicago ones, MangoMan) and shout whatever you want and expect them not to ask you to leave?

3) These are private companies able to do whatever they want (within the law). There are no laws preventing what each of them individually decided to do. Some of us believe they were probably years past doing what they did. Especially in regards to Trump and his Twitter account.

4) Why is Microsoft missing? How did they not become part of this conspiracy / collusion?

5) It's as simple as last Wednesday was a catalytic event which caused all of these giants to finally come to their senses. The same way in Watergate when enough of a tipping point was reached so Nixon even lost his until then Republican supporters.

[SomeDude]

Indeed, a Parler executive told me that of the thirteen people arrested as of Monday for the breach at the Capitol, none appear to be active users of Parler. The Capitol breach was planned far more on Facebook and YouTube.

No authoritarians believe they are authoritarians. No matter how repressive are the measures they support — censorship, monopoly power, no-fly lists for American citizens without due process — they tell themselves that those they are silencing and attacking are so evil, are terrorists, that anything done against them is noble and benevolent, not despotic and repressive. That is how American liberals currently think, as they fortify the control of Silicon Valley monopolies over our political lives, exemplified by the overnight destruction of a new and popular competitor.

Skimmed the article, very good, love the conclusion.

I do have an issue with the first paragraph above. The idea that there was some "Breach" at the Capital is a debunked conspiracy theory. It's not even that they didn't lock the doors, they opened them and escorted people in. The videos are out there. Security on walkie talkies getting radioed to let people in.

A bunch of middle-aged un-armed people, some in silly costumes CANT just walk through the capitol building while the entire Congress is in session. One armed guard firing a rifle in the air or even locked doors would keep all but the window-breaking ANTIFA out.

Calling it a breach or insurrection or riot is stupid. I don't even care if there were some ANTIFA acting badly. They didn't even lock the doors. Cops are resigning and "committing suicide" over it (yeah ok). I know I know, everything is a conspiracy right? It's either that or the most bonkers insane coincidence.

The "breach" was an orchestrated event to provide cover for censorship, crackdowns on people, impeachment, removal of the prez, new anti-protest powers for Biden etc.

I know I know guys, it was a horrible violent mob that broke down the doors lol. un-armed everyday Americans WALKED in while the ENTIRE Congress was in Session. Do you really think that's physically possible if they weren't let in?

[Cortopassi]

a3187dac155f.jpg

(Sorry I am still getting email notified on this thread so I am answering because I like sparring with pug!)

You are free to conduct your life without those companies that are supposedly choking off free speech.

Put the iPhone down, pug. Drop your Prime subscription. Got an old Blackberry?

There have been no companies, in my estimation, that have promoted so much free ranging speech in the history of the world than those that are being castigated right now. Boo hoo, Trump got banned, throw the whole industry under the bus.