Facebook permanently locks conservative children books publisher

[pknopp]

The only reason why the private company status was brought into this thread was because lefties are looking for a way to justify censorship. The ugly suppression of speech still happened, and lefties are here to defend it.

Facts are facts. They are nothing more.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The only reason why the private company status was brought into this thread was because lefties are looking for a way to justify censorship. The ugly suppression of speech still happened, and lefties are here to defend it.

Private company status was brought into this thread because private companies are not bound by the same laws as the Govt.

I am here to defend a private company making a business decisions just as I defended the right of a baker to say "no, I will not make that cake". I suppose you attacked the guy for saying that.

 

[Votto]

The only reason why the private company status was brought into this thread was because lefties are looking for a way to justify censorship. The ugly suppression of speech still happened, and lefties are here to defend it.

Well the Left can't shout everyone down, so what choice do they have but to censor what they cannot shout down?

After all, they are unable to defend anything they are doing or have done in recent memory, so what choice do they have?

That is fascism 101.

 

[EvMetro]

No justification is needed. They are a private company that has every legal right to do so.

Their legal rights and private status do not mean that they did not suppress free speech. You are here to defend the suppression, which is the ugly part of what is going on here

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Even when a company has paid Facebook for advertising?

I beg to differ.

As long as they gave the money back there is no problem.

 

[bodecea]

Facebook strikes again.

Now let's hear the whines "it's a private business!"

Fox Business: Facebook 'permanently' locks account of conservative children's book publisher.

Facebook reverses course after 'permanently' locking account of conservative children's book publisher

Facebook has reversed course after “permanently" disabling the ads account of a conservative children's book publisher, claiming that Heroes of Liberty – which has published books about Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett, former President Ronald Reagan and author Thomas Sowell – violated...

www.foxbusiness.com

"Heroes of Liberty"....................

 

[Oddball]

Facebook and Twitter should stop making the case that it needs regulation as a public utility.

Why haven't they given the publisher's money back. A year's advertising was paid in advance. Refund the money.

Or declare the entire interweb an information right-of-way....More in line with the "legitimate" functions of The State.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Their legal rights and private status do not mean that they did not suppress free speech. You are here to defend the suppression, which is the ugly part of what is going on here

I am here to defend a private company making a business decisions just as I defended the right of a baker to say "no, I will not make that cake". I suppose you attacked the guy for saying that.

 

[Captain Caveman]

Its status as a private company does not mean that it did not censor.

Let's first be clear on what censorship is, here is how Wikipedia defines censorship:

"Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information. This may be done on the basis that such material is considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or "inconvenient". Censorship can be conducted by governments, private institutions and other controlling bodies."

The world is stuck in the ***** Lefty agenda. Everything has to be wrapped in cotton wool and petted. Won't be long before creeping up on someone and then saying, "Boo", will be illegal.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Private company status was brought into this thread because private companies are not bound by the same laws as the Govt.

I am here to defend a private company making a business decisions just as I defended the right of a baker to say "no, I will not make that cake". I suppose you attacked the guy for saying that.

Your fact scenario may not fit the current situation.

ABC company pays Facebook to post advertisements. Pays Facebook. Then Facebook shut them down? That's what I am gathering. Maybe I am mislead.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

How do you know they have not?

I read the article.

 

[pknopp]

This site won't allow you to advertise other chat sites.........SHUT THEM DOWN, friggen fascists.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

You fact scenario may not fit the current situation.

ABC company pays Facebook to post advertisements. Pays Facebook. Then Facebook shut them down? That's what I am gathering. Maybe I am mislead.

Yes, FB shut them down for breaking their rules.

If a company paid FoxNews for advertisements and then put things in their advertisements that violated FoxNews rules, should FoxNews not be able to pull the plug on said ads?

 

[bodecea]

Read the OP. Some bullshit about disruptive content. More like some twatwaffle leftist got their panties in a twist

"some bullshit about disruptive con-tent".....so you have no idea.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I read the article.

The article did not say one way or the other.

 

[bodecea]

I called that one, eh?

You mean you actually told the truth for once? Shocking. Truly shocking.

 

[EvMetro]

Private company status was brought into this thread because private companies are not bound by the same laws as the Govt.

Censorship is censorship, regardless of who does it. Your political allies suppressed children's books, which is ugly. You are so happy that your political opponents took a hit, that you do not care about suppression of speech. You are here to defend censorship, that is your only intent on this thread.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

How about I come to your house and plant a giant sign there that says “EvMetro is a loser”.

You’d of course take down such a sign.

Thing is, you would be equally able to be accused of censorship since my sign is speech and you’ve suppressed it.

I pay you for advertising on your house. You decide that you don't like the sign. You take down my sign and keep the money.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Private company status was brought into this thread because private companies are not bound by the same laws as the Govt.

I am here to defend a private company making a business decisions just as I defended the right of a baker to say "no, I will not make that cake". I suppose you attacked the guy for saying that.

You would defend the baker, photographer or florist who refused services to a same sex couple, wouldn't you?

 

[bodecea]

No it's you leftist loons are predictable

As predictable as the whining from the right wing cult?