Steve Bannon wants to regulate Google & Facebook - Yes or No?

[konradv]

White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon reportedly is calling for regulation on tech giants such as Google and Facebook.

But not Breitbart? Trying to hamstring the competition?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon reportedly is calling for regulation on tech giants such as Google and Facebook.

But not Breitbart? Trying to hamstring the competition?

Do people view Breitbart as a competitor to Google or Facebook? Does Breitbart have a social component I don't know about? Are Google and Facebook doing original reporting?

 

[konradv]

White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon reportedly is calling for regulation on tech giants such as Google and Facebook.

But not Breitbart? Trying to hamstring the competition?

Do people view Breitbart as a competitor to Google or Facebook? Does Breitbart have a social component I don't know about? Are Google and Facebook doing original reporting?

He wants to regulate them because of their influence, but isn't that what Breitbart peddles, too?

 

[JGalt]

White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon reportedly is calling for regulation on tech giants such as Google and Facebook.

But not Breitbart? Trying to hamstring the competition?

Breitbart doesn't run a social media site.

 

[konradv]

Breitbart doesn't run a social media site.

Oh no? It has a Facebook page and allows for comments to their articles. That's being involved in the social media game, IMO.

 

[JGalt]

Breitbart doesn't run a social media site.

Oh no? It has a Facebook page and allows for comments to their articles. That's being involved in the social media game, IMO.

So does NBC, CBS, and ABC, and they're all regulated by the FCC. What's your point?

 

[konradv]

Breitbart doesn't run a social media site.

Oh no? It has a Facebook page and allows for comments to their articles. That's being involved in the social media game, IMO.

So does NBC, CBS, and ABC, and they're all regulated by the FCC. What's your point?

That Bannon is a hypocrite. I thought that would be obvious.

 

[JGalt]

Breitbart doesn't run a social media site.

Oh no? It has a Facebook page and allows for comments to their articles. That's being involved in the social media game, IMO.

So does NBC, CBS, and ABC, and they're all regulated by the FCC. What's your point?

That Bannon is a hypocrite. I thought that would be obvious.

You don't understand the true meaning of the word "hypocrite" until you take a closer look at the slimebags who inhabited Obama's administration.

 

[Moonglow]

By regulate does he mean tax? Since it has been brought up by Stevearino, along with his 44% tax on rich folks...

 

[konradv]

Breitbart doesn't run a social media site.

Oh no? It has a Facebook page and allows for comments to their articles. That's being involved in the social media game, IMO.

So does NBC, CBS, and ABC, and they're all regulated by the FCC. What's your point?

That Bannon is a hypocrite. I thought that would be obvious.

You don't understand the true meaning of the word "hypocrite" until you take a closer look at the slimebags who inhabited Obama's administration.

You're deflecting from your own topic, because you realize I'm right. You can't defend Bannon, so you have to bring up Obama. Lame!!!

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

No!

If the story is true then Bannon need to step back and realize Farsebook and Giggle are here now but like Lycos and MySpace they will be distant memories in another twenty years or so as society move onward to the newer and shiny thing that will come along.

Also Giggle and Farsebook are not required to have and are optional in our daily lives like the USMB...

Actually the USMB might be more important than Farsebook and Giggle...

 

[HenryBHough]

NO!

They MUST be allowed to continue allowing racist hate, kiddie-porn all all the other stuff so dear to liberal hearts!

If impeded there could be mass liberalcides!

Wait.....

how would THAT be a bad thingie??????

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon reportedly is calling for regulation on tech giants such as Google and Facebook.

But not Breitbart? Trying to hamstring the competition?

Do people view Breitbart as a competitor to Google or Facebook? Does Breitbart have a social component I don't know about? Are Google and Facebook doing original reporting?

He wants to regulate them because of their influence, but isn't that what Breitbart peddles, too?

You're probably right about his motivations, but it doesn't change the fact that Breitbart and Facebook are not competitors. Facebook and Google facilitate the spread of information, whereas Breitbart creates content out of information. I suppose I see what you're trying to say, but I just don't think it works. Facebook and Google are ubiquitous in basically all aspects of online life, whereas Breitbart is very narrow.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Breitbart doesn't run a social media site.

Oh no? It has a Facebook page and allows for comments to their articles. That's being involved in the social media game, IMO.

Now here I think you undermine your own argument and make Bannon's alleged argument. If Breitbart is forced to sit at the Google and/or Facebook table with everyone else I don't think you can compare it as a competitor to them. If Breitbart were a competitor to Facebook it wouldn't need a Facebook page to increase traffic and engagement with its content. That would all be done in-house.

 

[FA_Q2]

Utilities?

Stupid idea. Break them up into little pieces so they cannot monopolize a market. It has been done before...from rail roads to oil companies to telecomunications companies to airlines...this is not new stuff.

Particularly cable companies. Their monopolies need to end.

It basically has. The market has responded with things like Netflix, Hulu and Youtube in lashing back at the veritable monopoly that the cable companies have had.

There is a huge shift away from them in general because you can get your content on these alternative sources.

 

[Darkwind]

Utilities?

Stupid idea. Break them up into little pieces so they cannot monopolize a market. It has been done before...from rail roads to oil companies to telecomunications companies to airlines...this is not new stuff.

Particularly cable companies. Their monopolies need to end.

It basically has. The market has responded with things like Netflix, Hulu and Youtube in lashing back at the veritable monopoly that the cable companies have had.

There is a huge shift away from them in general because you can get your content on these alternative sources.

Many people are still dependent upon them for internet connections. They carve out little niches in markets and then allow tiny little DSL companies to run internet on existing phone lines, but if you want to purchase a broadband connection, you're stuck with the cable company monopoly.

I don't even purchase TV anymore since I use a Kodi application that streams all the movies I want for free. I get everything that Netflix and Hulu offer for free, and more.

 

[g5000]

By regulate does he mean tax?

No, he means regulate as in break them up.

Since it has been brought up by Stevearino, along with his 44% tax on rich folks...

Yep.

Steve Bannon Pushing for 44 Percent Marginal Tax Rate on the Very Rich

 

[g5000]

By the way, the OP does not link to the source story.

Here: Steve Bannon Wants Facebook and Google Regulated Like Utilities

 

[TNHarley]

The only way the internet could get any more fucked up is if the govt gets involved more.

 

[Moonglow]

By regulate does he mean tax?

No, he means regulate as in break them up.

Since it has been brought up by Stevearino, along with his 44% tax on rich folks...

Yep.

Steve Bannon Pushing for 44 Percent Marginal Tax Rate on the Very Rich

But they are not monopolies and he therefore couldn't...With Microsoft they would have a better chance...