META (Facebook) Banning Conservatives over their opinions.....

[MinTrut]

The government must take over. Only the omnipotent power of the state can save us.

Your idiotic straw man spamming is noted.

You're added NOTHING to the conversation.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

And this, sad to say, is the thread win:

Trump's Truth Social barred from Google Play store over content moderation concerns

As has been pointed out repeatedly, no one can compete with Facebook, Twitter, et al because the gatekeepers of the new public square will shut them down, forcing The People back onto their platforms.

SCOTUS must weigh in.

How dare companies have standards the those wishing to do business with them must follow.

Such things should be illegal.

 

[dblack]

So, functionally the fairness doctrine. Again. Something that you have been avoiding directly addressing.

How do you think this is any different than what the democrats have been calling for the past few decades?

It's different when "we" do it.

 

[MinTrut]

How dare companies have standards the those wishing to do business with them must follow.

^ Can't see his own ox being gored.

Such things should be illegal.

Monopolies are quite evil indeed.

One can only hope that SCOTUS weighs in, and properly, but we're now pretty much a banana republic.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Monopolies are quite evil indeed.

They are a natural outcome of capitalism. They are neither evil nor good, they just are.

But they are irrelevant to this discussion. The internet is basically infinite, pretty much anyone can start a site at anytime, I have had a few myself over the years. If there were a monopoly you and I would not be having this discussion.

One can only hope that SCOTUS weighs in, and properly

Yes, must get big brother to punish success whenever possible.

 

[MinTrut]

They are a natural outcome of capitalism. They are neither evil nor good, they just are.

But they are irrelevant to this discussion. The internet is basically infinite, pretty much anyone can start a site at anytime, I have had a few myself over the years. If there were a monopoly you and I would not be having this discussion.



Yes, must get big brother to punish success whenever possible.

And see it shut down by the Big Tech monopoly.

You're choosing not to get it, but that's who you are, bless you.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

And see it shut down by the Big Tech monopoly.

You're choosing not to get it, but that's who you are, bless you.

Yet here we are, bad mouthing the Big Tech monopoly. I could go to 1000 other sites and do the same thing.

Pretty shitty monopoly

 

[dblack]

But they are irrelevant to this discussion.

Agreed. This discussion is about whether we want to drive off a totalitarian cliff.

Both the left and the right want to sink their claws into social media, so it's probably going to happen. Once freedom of speech goes, the slippery slope gets steeper.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Agreed. This discussion is about whether we want to drive off a totalitarian cliff.

Both the left and the right want to sink their claws into social media, so it's probably going to happen. Once freedom of speech goes, the slippery slope gets steeper.

As soon as you hold FB or Twitter to the same standard as an actual publisher sites like this will cease to exist overnight.

 

[dblack]

As soon as you hold FB or Twitter to the same standard as an actual publisher sites like this will cease to exist overnight.

Like I've said elsewhere, the courts would settle on a precedent that essentially recreates sec. 230. People don't want to shut down the internet. So we won't.

 

[FA_Q2]

Yet here we are, bad mouthing the Big Tech monopoly. I could go to 1000 other sites and do the same thing.

Pretty shitty monopoly

You notice how they can't actually name the singular company that compromises 'big tech monopoly' as they are well aware there is not one. A secret cabal of companies needs to be invoked along with a myriad of other conspiracy theories to even make sense of the idea.


And the solution to this mysterious monopoly, cement the monopoly into law. That is the ticket.

 

[FA_Q2]

Like I've said elsewhere, the courts would settle on a precedent that essentially recreates sec. 230. People don't want to shut down the internet. So we won't.

If that was the solution, you may have a point. You know that is not the solution though. DeSantis did not remove 230 protections, he put in his own requirements and no one is seriously talking about simply repealing 230.

They are UNIVERSALLY talking about replacing it with their own controls. Sure, these sites will not cease to exist, instead they will start to look like Russia Today or Korea Central TV.

 

[dblack]

And the solution to this mysterious monopoly, cement the monopoly into law. That is the ticket.

This. Same shit, different argument: "Problem: Health care is controlled by handful of powerful corporations. Solution: Single payer!" - and generally delivered with no appreciation for the irony.

 

[dblack]

If that was the solution, you may have a point. You know that is not the solution though.

I'm calling their bluff. If removing section 230 would satisfy them, I'm all for repealing it.

But you're right. It's not even a genuine concern. They don't give a rat's ass about the rights and responsibilities of "publishers" vs "platforms", or freedom of speech, or monopolies, or any of the other half-hearted excuses they whip out.

This is about vengeance, or at least that's where the popular support is coming from. People are embracing retaliatory government in the name of the culture war. That's what they love about Desantis. He uses state power to go after woke companies, and anyone else the populists don't like.

 

[Man of Ethics]

This is about vengeance, or at least that's where the popular support is coming from. People are embracing retaliatory government in the name of the culture war. That's what they love about Desantis. He uses state power to go after woke companies, and anyone else the populists don't like.

I am 100% for Ron DeSantis, because he turns Cancel Culture back on Progressives. Hopefully more Conservatives embrace Cancel Culture and apply it to Intolerant Leftists.

 

[Man of Ethics]

As has been pointed out repeatedly, no one can compete with Facebook, Twitter, et al because the gatekeepers of the new public square will shut them down, forcing The People back onto their platforms.

SCOTUS must weigh in.

Hopefully they will -- there are 6 Conservatives on SC.

In any case, I hope Free Speech Social Media gains momentum which would be impossible for Progressives to censor.

 

[Synthaholic]

And they are selling our data for profit... SO, IT IS NOT FREE.

Then don't visit their sites. Even a moron or a Trumper can figure that out.

 

[dblack]

I am 100% for Ron DeSantis, because he turns Cancel Culture back on Progressives. Hopefully more Conservatives embrace Cancel Culture and apply it to Intolerant Leftists.

Exactly. Republicans are adopting the tactics of liberals, and the values that go with them. What good does it do to elect Republicans if they're going to govern like Democrats?

 

[MinTrut]

Yet here we are, bad mouthing the Big Tech monopoly. I could go to 1000 other sites and do the same thing.

Pretty shitty monopoly

At best, you're choosing not to get it.

 

[MinTrut]

Agreed. This discussion is about whether we want to drive off a totalitarian cliff.

Both the left and the right want to sink their claws into social media, so it's probably going to happen. Once freedom of speech goes, the slippery slope gets steeper.

Liberals control social media.

The left and the right want the new public square protected from their totalitarianism.