The Bird is Freed

The shots stop transmission. We want to make sure you, big tech, understand this and stop any discussion otherwise.
 
Garmel said:
Yes, this is completely comparable to components of our government that are working together with a private company to censor speech they don't want out.

If Trump was doing this you would be freaking out. Since it's dems you don't care.
Click to expand...


Except he did and does. Truth social censors stuff. Trumps President twatter account blocked people for saying things he didnt like which he was sued for and lost because it was an official government account. Trump has retaliated against numerous people and organizations for speech he disnt like. Worse than censoring he required people to say certain things who he had authority over. For example Dr Fauchi had to censor his speech to avoid triggering the snowflake. Trump has retaliated against even Fox News for not being partisan enough.... fox news....
 
cajunrevenge said:
Except he did and does. Truth social censors stuff. Trumps President twatter account blocked people for saying things he didnt like which he was sued for and lost because it was an official government account. Trump has retaliated against numerous people and organizations for speech he disnt like. Worse than censoring he required people to say certain things who he had authority over. For example Dr Fauchi had to censor his speech to avoid triggering the snowflake. Trump has retaliated against even Fox News for not being partisan enough.... fox news....
Click to expand...

Once again, as you did with the Sussman case the other day, you can't create a logical argument so you do a whataboutism involving Trump that is a whole different subject matter. Don't waste my time with this nonsense.

We're talking about government colluding with tech.
 
Did you miss my previous posts about how there is nothing illegal or unconstitutional about the government working with social media platforms to moderate their platform? If the government pressures the company to censor information I agree it is wrong. If the government goes to the company and the company wants the help sorting out what to moderate then theres nothing wrong with that. I am willing to bet in most in at least some of these cases it's the company that asked the government for help identifying Russian disinformation. We can argue over what us and is t disinformation but these private companies get to choose what and how to moderate their platform. You certainly wont ever hear me complain about what Musk does with twatter. It's his company and he gets to choose the moderation policy.



And you missed a lot if you think my only defense of Sussman related to what others did. Like how he cant be at a meeting representing the Clinton campaign even the campaign told him not to tell the FBI. And you also missed that a lie has to be material to the investigation, which it was not.
 
Last edited:
cajunrevenge said:
Did you miss my previous posts about how there is nothing illegal or unconstitutional about the government working with social media platforms to moderate their platform? If the government pressures the company to censor information I agree it is wrong. If the government goes to the company and the company wants the help sorting out what to moderate then theres nothing wrong with that. I am willing to bet in most in at least some of these cases it's the company that asked the government for help identifying Russian disinformation. We can argue over what us and is t disinformation but these private companies get to choose what and how to moderate their platform. You certainly wont ever hear me complain about what Musk does with twatter. It's his company and he gets to choose the moderation policy.
Click to expand...

You can say it but it doesn't make it fact. The government is not allowed to work with one group in order to censor another unless under special circumstances. "Misinformation" is not exactly national security. It's that simple.

Even the ACLU who isn't republican friendly knows this is an infringement of the 1st amendment.
 
I look forward to all those lawsuits that come from this since it's not allowed. Spoiler warning, there will be none because they have no legal basis.


Also, ACLU is a trash organization now. There was a civil war and the anti-first amendment side won.
 
Garmel said:
You're right to a degree but the line is drawn when the government and tech start working together to censor others.
Click to expand...

I dunno. I'm ok with the likes of yelp and Trip Advisor and FB and twitter deciding what is best for their bottom lines. The new owner of twitter will probably change things up some. It is his business. I might have some opinions about whether the changes are good or bad, but it is his call.
 
nsacpi said:
I dunno. I'm ok with the likes of yelp and Trip Advisor and FB and twitter deciding what is best for their bottom lines. The new owner of twitter will probably change things up some. It is his business. I might have some opinions about whether the changes are good or bad, but it is his call.
Click to expand...

It has nothing to do with their business bottom line. It has to do with the limits of government. Once again, the government can't be involved in the censoring of others. Why is this so damn hard to understand why this is dangerous?
 
I don't know that there is a good solution to the proliferation of deza. Maybe the least bad is to let it proliferate. I dont begrudge platforms the right to seek ways, including working with los federales, the right to curb um censor the deza.
 
nsacpi said:
I don't know that there is a good solution to the proliferation of deza. Maybe the least bad is to let it proliferate. I dont begrudge platforms the right to seek ways, including working with los federales, the right to curb um censor the deza.
Click to expand...

The MSM puts out a lot of disinformation and we're still alive. Right wing sites that produce disinformation won't cause society to crash and burn either. You don't mind censorship because it goes in one direction most of the time. If your side started getting hit more often you'd be singing a different tune.

As we've seen over the last two years what's considered "disinformation" has turned out to be true on many occasions. That's why I dislike censorship of so-called "deza". The censorship of valid Covid info did a lot of harm.
 
Last edited:
nsacpi said:
I don't know that there is a good solution to the proliferation of deza. Maybe the least bad is to let it proliferate. I dont begrudge platforms the right to seek ways, including working with los federales, the right to curb um censor the deza.
Click to expand...

What about true, useful information ?
 
sturg33 said:
The outright panic from leftists that their preferred ideology is not running a communication platform has been really enlightening to watch.

[Tw]1586756288045883396[/tw]
Click to expand...

You do realize Apple does have that level of power right? Like apple is why Tumblr doesn't have nudity anymore and no uses tumblr.
 
zitothebrave said:
You do realize Apple does have that level of power right? Like apple is why Tumblr doesn't have nudity anymore and no uses tumblr.
Click to expand...

Yes zito.

I realize they can do that.

My commentary was on how the left is terrified they don't control the platform anymore. They simply don't know how to sell their narrative in a free speech environment
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top