Censorship continued: first the Parler app then @realDonaldTrump

[yankees60]

Yet when it comes down to it...the conservatives / the right / the Republicans / the Trump supporters seem to, without fail, behave EXACTLY as they are are ALWAYS accusing the other side of behaving. Which means all those accusations ring hollow and those accusers reveal themselves to have little integrity and are incapable of living up to their espoused principles.

You left out that the radio media seems to have thrown their weight to one side with their 90 million per week listeners compared to the only 7 million per listeners to the other side.

Many, including me, believe that it was way past time to the media finally waking up to how skillfully Trump had been playing and using them to is main purposes. Which is, as always, whatever is best for Trump.

What these PRIVATE companies have just recently done is way past due Years past due.

Please stop parroting what the media fed you and think for yourself.

Even the article you linked is clear that no one if asking the government to take sides. Twitter lets 'Hang Mike Pence' trend the same day Parler is banned from Google. No one is asking for special treatment, only equal treatment.

Why should I not be surprised to get this standard response from a Trump supporter when you deviate from the Trump supporter position? If you believe any differently from the stand standard Trump supporter line then you don't think for yourself and you are brainwashed by the media and parroting what they fed you. A close second is..."Do your research"....which really means keep researching until you can find that same wacky position that I hold to.

In case you missed it....my main media source is C-Span. The true ONLY "fair and balanced" media in our country.

I've listened to a three hour Trump rally in its entirety THREE times in a row. How many of them have you listened to in their entirety? When I am taking in so much direct Trump contact with ZERO filters how is that Big Bad Media brainwashing me of anything?

The "Please stop parroting what the media fed you and think for yourself" response is both a weak and an offensive response. It has NO content and NO substance. Just an attempt to counter anything that does not agree with the standard Trump supporter line.

[InsuranceGuy]

[deleted]

[ahhrunforthehills]

Please stop parroting what the media fed you and think for yourself.

Even the article you linked is clear that no one if asking the government to take sides. Twitter lets 'Hang Mike Pence' trend the same day Parler is banned from Google. No one is asking for special treatment, only equal treatment.

Why should I not be surprised to get this standard response from a Trump supporter when you deviate from the Trump supporter position? If you believe any differently from the stand standard Trump supporter line then you don't think for yourself and you are brainwashed by the media and parroting what they fed you. A close second is..."Do your research"....which really means keep researching until you can find that same wacky position that I hold to.

In case you missed it....my main media source is C-Span. The true ONLY "fair and balanced" media in our country.

I've listened to a three hour Trump rally in its entirety THREE times in a row. How many of them have you listened to in their entirety? When I am taking in so much direct Trump contact with ZERO filters how is that Big Bad Media brainwashing me of anything?

The "Please stop parroting what the media fed you and think for yourself" response is both a weak and an offensive response. It has NO content and NO substance. Just an attempt to counter anything that does not agree with the standard Trump supporter line.

Comical as I am not a Trump supporter, but I happen to be married to one. I do support the liberty of her to express her beliefs no matter how much I disagree with them. I guess everyone that disagrees with you is a Trump supporter.

The reason for my comment about being fed is that you linked an article to support your position that the article itself did not support. Feel free to censor my posts if you find them offensive, I believe there is an option for that.

+1

The liberals that post here automatically start treating the moderates as die-hard conservatives. I don't understand why people go back-and-forth so much with people that are running on pure emotional bias

[yankees60]

Please stop parroting what the media fed you and think for yourself.

Even the article you linked is clear that no one if asking the government to take sides. Twitter lets 'Hang Mike Pence' trend the same day Parler is banned from Google. No one is asking for special treatment, only equal treatment.

Why should I not be surprised to get this standard response from a Trump supporter when you deviate from the Trump supporter position? If you believe any differently from the stand standard Trump supporter line then you don't think for yourself and you are brainwashed by the media and parroting what they fed you. A close second is..."Do your research"....which really means keep researching until you can find that same wacky position that I hold to.

In case you missed it....my main media source is C-Span. The true ONLY "fair and balanced" media in our country.

I've listened to a three hour Trump rally in its entirety THREE times in a row. How many of them have you listened to in their entirety? When I am taking in so much direct Trump contact with ZERO filters how is that Big Bad Media brainwashing me of anything?

The "Please stop parroting what the media fed you and think for yourself" response is both a weak and an offensive response. It has NO content and NO substance. Just an attempt to counter anything that does not agree with the standard Trump supporter line.

Comical as I am not a Trump supporter, but I happen to be married to one. I do support the liberty of her to express her beliefs no matter how much I disagree with them. I guess everyone that disagrees with you is a Trump supporter.

The reason for my comment about being fed is that you linked an article to support your position that the article itself did not support. Feel free to censor my posts if you find them offensive, I believe there is an option for that.

+1

The liberals that post here automatically start treating the moderates as die-hard conservatives. I don't understand why people go back-and-forth so much with people that are running on pure emotional bias

So ironic! The conservatives that post here automatically start treating the moderates (on the other side) as die-hard liberals!

I did not vote for Biden.

I would would have never voted for Bernie.

I would have had to have thought long and hard before I would have voted for either Warren or Harris.

In response to the above from InsuranceGuy (trying to squeeze in as much as possible into my once every 1/2 hour quota)....

I don't treat everyone who disagrees with me as being a Trump supporter. I assume that anyone who used the tired Trump supporter line of "think for yourself and stop being a media parrot" IS a Trump supporter.

If you do not want me to assume that you are a Trump supporter then don't behave like one.

Sorry. That is the best I can do on limited information.

Sorry. That is the best I can do on limited information.

irony .... lol

[InsuranceGuy]

[deleted]

[doodle]

After censorship comes isolation...

https://www.nj.com/sports/2021/01/pga ... ays.html

[InsuranceGuy]

[deleted]

[Mark Leavy]

After censorship comes isolation...

https://www.nj.com/sports/2021/01/pga ... ays.html

Doodle. You seem like a smart guy. Does this not scare you?

[Mark Leavy]

Stripe: no longer processing payments for Trump's campaign website.

No word on if he can still buy groceries.

[doodle]

After censorship comes isolation...

https://www.nj.com/sports/2021/01/pga ... ays.html

Doodle. You seem like a smart guy. Does this not scare you?

Censorship is definitely concerning. Then again, haven't we established that private entities have the right to do as they please? Would the PGA not fall into this category? Same as Twitter, Google and Amazon? How would we reverse any of this without imposing on those freedoms? However, big tech has almost become like an information utility. Perhaps regulation? But that would be invoking government...which is a no no...so I'm not really sure how to solve this...what is the libertarian response to this issue?

Also, what are the limitations of free speech? At what point do ones first amendment rights run out? Did Lin Wood cross the line when he talked about putting Pence before a firing squad? Is taking that down off Parler acceptable censorship?

[yankees60]

There is a certain unnamed individual in this forum who would constantly label anyone who did not exhibit the same TWD as he regularly did to then be deemed to certainly have at least Stage IV TDS.

We were also told that IF the election was not rigged that Trump would win in a landslide.

That there is almost no need of government of any form.

That anyone who does not support Trump (this person' proclaimed "best president of all time") therefore must not be in full possession of their faculties.

If we accept that person as having written all these truths....then this is TRULY a conservative country with the great majority supporting Trump. With these Trump supporters being THE quality people in our country.

Then why overnight (not really but close to it...) cannot this superior group of people ALL leave Facebook and Twitter and go to THE conservative counterparts that their most superior-ist group of people created??!!

It's not like they'd have to start from scratch to recreate a Facebook and a Twitter.

These people are so brilliant that they should be easily to reverse engineer both of them so as to be close enough but not so close as to infringe on any patents either Facebook or Twitter has.

Wouldn't you have expected these brilliant people in their brilliance to already have had the foresight to have things things already created so that in case what is going on actually happened ....these alternatives could just be rolled out at the flick of a switch? To have everything figured out so that it'd be beyond anyone to take anything away from them?

Even I....when I had my long-term (12 years) email changed on me....I said "never again" and immediately starting hosting my own web site so no one would ever be able to change my email address for the rest of my life.

Is it possible that maybe all that that unnamed individual has told me / us isn't the reality?

That Trump has failed in the marketplace of ideas which resulted in him losing the house, the senate, the presidency...culminated by last Wednesday's event precipitated and presided over by him.......that there would not be mass abandonment of Twitter and Facebook (who because of last Wednesday's events finally started to enforce all their polices that they'd prior let be violated. That they realized that this was the result when a bunch with no regard for the law or the norms of society behave as they truly are?).

[Mark Leavy]

After censorship comes isolation...

https://www.nj.com/sports/2021/01/pga ... ays.html

Doodle. You seem like a smart guy. Does this not scare you?

Censorship is definitely concerning. Then again, haven't we established that private entities have the right to do as they please? Would the PGA not fall into this category? Same as Twitter, Google and Amazon? How would we reverse any of this without imposing on those freedoms? Then again, big tech has almost become like an information utility. Perhaps regulation? But then again, that would be invoking government...which is a no no...so I'm not really sure how to solve this...what is the libertarian response to this issue?

Also, what are the limitations of free speech? At what point do ones first amendment rights run out? Did Lin Wood cross the line when he talked about putting Pence before a firing squad?

I have no issue with Amazon, Google, Twitter, etc. crushing their enemies and rejoicing in the lamentations of their women. That's just business.

But that doesn't answer the question. A person should take note. A doodler could wake up on the wrong side of that steam roller some day. Does that not scare you?

[glennds]

Would the PGA not fall into this category? Same as Twitter, Google and Amazon?

I would bet PGA was just making a business decision. Disassociating from Trump reduces the risk of damage to their brand.
It could be that simple, and have nothing to do with censorship, the deep state or anything else.

Twitter, Google and Amazon are more complicated.

[doodle]

After censorship comes isolation...

https://www.nj.com/sports/2021/01/pga ... ays.html

Doodle. You seem like a smart guy. Does this not scare you?

Censorship is definitely concerning. Then again, haven't we established that private entities have the right to do as they please? Would the PGA not fall into this category? Same as Twitter, Google and Amazon? How would we reverse any of this without imposing on those freedoms? Then again, big tech has almost become like an information utility. Perhaps regulation? But then again, that would be invoking government...which is a no no...so I'm not really sure how to solve this...what is the libertarian response to this issue?

Also, what are the limitations of free speech? At what point do ones first amendment rights run out? Did Lin Wood cross the line when he talked about putting Pence before a firing squad?

I have no issue with Amazon, Google, Twitter, etc. crushing their enemies and rejoicing in the lamentations of their women. That's just business.

But that doesn't answer the question. A person should take note. A doodler could wake up on the wrong side of that steam roller some day. Does that not scare you?

I think open dialogue is almost always best...however, take the recent censoring of Lin Wood on Parler where he basically called for Pence to face a firing squad. Is it appropriate in certain circumstances?

As far as your steam roller, we are talking about private entities not allowing individuals to use their forum to espouse certain ideas. To me that seems like me coming over to your house and insulting your wife and you telling me to leave. I'd liken a steamroller more to government speech police rounding individuals up and throwing them in jail. If it gets to that point I will certainly resist. People should have the right to say stupid shit. But again, at what point does their right to do that infringe on other people's right to life? That's the question here. Certain voices in BLM and on the right are toeing that line pretty close when they start calling for death to police or insurrection.

[yankees60]

After censorship comes isolation...

https://www.nj.com/sports/2021/01/pga ... ays.html

Doodle. You seem like a smart guy. Does this not scare you?

Censorship is definitely concerning. Then again, haven't we established that private entities have the right to do as they please? Would the PGA not fall into this category? Same as Twitter, Google and Amazon? How would we reverse any of this without imposing on those freedoms? Then again, big tech has almost become like an information utility. Perhaps regulation? But then again, that would be invoking government...which is a no no...so I'm not really sure how to solve this...what is the libertarian response to this issue?

Also, what are the limitations of free speech? At what point do ones first amendment rights run out? Did Lin Wood cross the line when he talked about putting Pence before a firing squad?

I have no issue with Amazon, Google, Twitter, etc. crushing their enemies and rejoicing in the lamentations of their women. That's just business.

But that doesn't answer the question. A person should take note. A doodler could wake up on the wrong side of that steam roller some day. Does that not scare you?

I know you are asking Doodle...but I'll give my short version of what I previously wrote a much longer version of...

I was regularly getting suspended by both Facebook and Twitter for various periods of time for breaking their rules.

At times I so depended upon each of them that it scared me (almost) to death of doing something that would result in either or both of them permanently banning me.

Since I never wanted that to happen.....I fully recognized that at all times I was a guest in their house and they got to make their house rules and I had no say or a vote in their house rules.

Therefore, I had to realize that if I wanted to remain a guest in their houses then I had to adapt my behavior so that neither of them would eve kick me out of their house.

I reread the Constitution and I could not find that part of it which plainly stated...."Vinny Natale gets to do whatever he wants to in Facebook and Twitter's houses and they must allow him to do so."

[Xan]

Mark didn't say they were required to let you do whatever. He just asked whether or not it scared you that they have so much power.

[glennds]

I've said this before, but in a society power is going to naturally coalesce somewhere. Either it's going to be in the hands of big corporations who upon finding capitalistic success will naturally use their power and resources to accrue more. Or alternatively it's going to be in the hands of government.

We've tried it both ways in the US. In the gilded age it was the large corporations, conglomerates and robber barons that accrued the power in the presence of a minimal government. Coincidentally or not, it was also an age of societal wealth disparity.
After the Crash and Great Depression, our government initiated antitrust legislation, broke up the concentrations of power and attempted to level the playing field and create a middle class.

We libertarians have to pick our poison. Either we have minimal government, and powerful private interests, or we allow representative government to create and enforce limitations. To expect a world where neither will exist is not realistic.
Some valid points have been raised in this thread about the closed ecosystems, app stores and degree of control in the hands of tech giants. I tend to think the social media platforms are still more voluntary and less of a stranglehold than the app ecosystems, but that may be because I'm personally not a big social media user.

I've heard an interview with a former government antitrust lawyer who said unequivocally that there are more than a handful of companies today that are in clear violation of current antitrust law, and have been for some time, but the Federal government has chosen not to enforce the laws. Recent noise in Congress suggests this may be changing. I realize this has to do with more than just censorship, but many of these issues run together.
What do others here think about the prospect of government exerting more influence on the tech giants? Too socialist? Then if you don't like the status quo, what's the alternative?

[Mark Leavy]

Facebook has locked Ron Paul out.

[flyingpylon]

As expected, Parler is now suing Amazon. Here's the paperwork: https://drive.google.com/file/d/10N3_J2 ... ylnoM/view

Interesting to note that last month Twitter and AWS signed a multi-year agreement for AWS to provide computing services to Twitter. Also that Parler claims Amazon leaked the termination letter to BuzzFeed before even sending it to them.

[edit: Mark posted while I was typing] In other news, Facebook has blocked Ron Paul from managing his page "due to repeatedly going against our community standards". What exactly are their "community standards"?

[glennds]

Interesting to note that last month Twitter and AWS signed a multi-year agreement for AWS to provide computing services to Twitter. Also that Parler claims Amazon leaked the termination letter to BuzzFeed before even sending it to them.

Instead of leaking it to BuzzFeed they should have done it right and tweeted it. Sheesh.

[yankees60]

I heard that it could cost $1 billion to set up all the infrastructure to set some form of alternative conservative network to Google / Amazon / Facebook / Twitter (Did I leave anyone out?).

First reading that may seem like that is a lot of money. However, if only half the population is conservative then that is only $6 per person in the country.

Where is the Go Fund Me campaign to get this done?

Where is the effective conservative response rather than playing victim?

[Mark Leavy]

It looks like you can setup your own bakery for only $10 to $50K. Seem's a low barrier if no one will sell you a cake.

No one is talking about being a victim. It is that the rules to the game are changing overnight. Until you know what the new rules are, it is hard to respond.

It looks as if all discrimination limits have been removed. Or is it still illegal to kick some customers out the door and not others? If, so which are which?

Hard to proceed until this is sorted out.

[doodle]

Facebook has locked Ron Paul out.

I'm confused why Libertarians are shocked that private businesses might discriminate. If they are within their rights to do so, and I think we have established that fact, then what is the issue? Sure, it's bad for free speech...but private entities have no constitutional obligation to provide people a forum to state their views.

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

its a far more muddled situation than it is being described, sure if it is "just" a business then libertarian principals apply,
when it is acting in concert with a government ( or as a part of government) and acting to censor the opposition to that part of government..

it is anti freedom and tyrannical in nature..

[Mark Leavy]

Doodle, are you incapable of understanding that a person can assess a situation without arguing for any kind of intervention? Do you assume every evaluation is either a complaint or an argument for other people to change?

[SomeDude]

Doodle, are you incapable of understanding that a person can assess a situation without arguing for any kind of intervention? Do you assume every evaluation is either a complaint or an argument for other people to change?

See Tomfoolery's avatar.