Should social media by regulated by the government?

[Tehon]

It should stop wherever we say it stops.

It's better than them ******* with us.

It's pretty simple mang, vote with yer feet.

Don't like Facebook? Don't join.

Lol, I'm not on facebook.

Nor am I willing to defer social relations to the magic of the market.

Then you already voted so WTF is the problem?

My problem is with you right wingers.

You haven't been paying attention.

I'm an unabashedly partisan liberal.

You are arguing from a right wing position.

 

[Crepitus]

Seriously, if you start ******* with private business where does it stop?

It should stop wherever we say it stops.

It's better than them ******* with us.

It's pretty simple mang, vote with yer feet.

Don't like Facebook? Don't join.

Social media plays a huge role in politics, to the point that censorship or favoritism by the platforms could really make an impact. The private sector already has too much influence.

How is that any different than the Koch brothers huge C-PACs?

Exactly.

It's bad enough already.

.......

 

[Confounding]

I'm a partisan liberal.

So much wasted potential.

It's pretty simple mang, vote with yer feet.

Don't like Facebook? Don't join.

Lol, I'm not on facebook.

Nor am I willing to defer social relations to the magic of the market.

Then you already voted so WTF is the problem?

My problem is with you right wingers.

You haven't been paying attention.

I'm an unabashedly partisan liberal.

You are arguing from a right wing position.

"It's okay when the corporate monsters taking over the world are on my side! I don't see a problem here."

 

[Crepitus]

It's pretty simple mang, vote with yer feet.

Don't like Facebook? Don't join.

Lol, I'm not on facebook.

Nor am I willing to defer social relations to the magic of the market.

Then you already voted so WTF is the problem?

My problem is with you right wingers.

You haven't been paying attention.

I'm an unabashedly partisan liberal.

You are arguing from a right wing position.

No, I'm arguing from the constitutional position, which in this case is pretty much nonpartisan. Censorship is bad because no matter which side is engaged in it everybody eventually loses.

 

[Crepitus]

I'm a partisan liberal.

So much wasted potential.

Lol, I'm not on facebook.

Nor am I willing to defer social relations to the magic of the market.

Then you already voted so WTF is the problem?

My problem is with you right wingers.

You haven't been paying attention.

I'm an unabashedly partisan liberal.

You are arguing from a right wing position.

"It's okay when the corporate monsters taking over the world are on my side! I don't see a problem here."

They are hardly taking over the world, they are monitoring their own content on their privately owned sites. Similar to what Fox news does with their programming.

 

[Confounding]

They are hardly taking over the world, they are monitoring their own content on their privately owned sites. Similar to what Fox news does with their programming.

You don't see potential for problems down the road with this stuff?

 

[Tehon]

Lol, I'm not on facebook.

Nor am I willing to defer social relations to the magic of the market.

Then you already voted so WTF is the problem?

My problem is with you right wingers.

You haven't been paying attention.

I'm an unabashedly partisan liberal.

You are arguing from a right wing position.

No, I'm arguing from the constitutional position, which in this case is pretty much nonpartisan. Censorship is bad because no matter which side is engaged in it everybody eventually loses.

No one takes the right wing seriously.

We don't want the government to censor. We want the government to regulate censorship. Do you see the difference?

 

[Crepitus]

They are hardly taking over the world, they are monitoring their own content on their privately owned sites. Similar to what Fox news does with their programming.

You don't see potential for problems down the road with this stuff?

Not really, no. Every company has been promoting their own viewpoint as long as there have been companies.

 

[Crepitus]

Then you already voted so WTF is the problem?

My problem is with you right wingers.

You haven't been paying attention.

I'm an unabashedly partisan liberal.

You are arguing from a right wing position.

No, I'm arguing from the constitutional position, which in this case is pretty much nonpartisan. Censorship is bad because no matter which side is engaged in it everybody eventually loses.

No one takes the right wing seriously.

We don't want the government to censor. We want the government to regulate censorship. Do you see the difference?

There is no difference here.

 

[Confounding]

They are hardly taking over the world, they are monitoring their own content on their privately owned sites. Similar to what Fox news does with their programming.

You don't see potential for problems down the road with this stuff?

Not really, no. Every company has been promoting their own viewpoint as long as there have been companies.

Do you think social media platforms have more potential for manipulating politics than most/any other companies? The internet and social media are becoming more and more vital in politics. I'm surprised you don't see it.

 

[Crepitus]

You guys also need to remember that the vast majority of people and content banned from these sites were removed for posting either verifiably false content or outright hate speech, not their party affiliation.

 

[Tehon]

My problem is with you right wingers.

You haven't been paying attention.

I'm an unabashedly partisan liberal.

You are arguing from a right wing position.

No, I'm arguing from the constitutional position, which in this case is pretty much nonpartisan. Censorship is bad because no matter which side is engaged in it everybody eventually loses.

No one takes the right wing seriously.

We don't want the government to censor. We want the government to regulate censorship. Do you see the difference?

There is no difference here.

Corporations are people?

 

[Crepitus]

They are hardly taking over the world, they are monitoring their own content on their privately owned sites. Similar to what Fox news does with their programming.

You don't see potential for problems down the road with this stuff?

Not really, no. Every company has been promoting their own viewpoint as long as there have been companies.

Do you think social media platforms have more potential for manipulating politics than most/any other companies? The internet and social media are becoming more and more vital in politics. I'm surprised you don't see it.

Of course I see it. What I don't see is anyone insisting that Infowars give equal time.

 

[Crepitus]

You haven't been paying attention.

I'm an unabashedly partisan liberal.

You are arguing from a right wing position.

No, I'm arguing from the constitutional position, which in this case is pretty much nonpartisan. Censorship is bad because no matter which side is engaged in it everybody eventually loses.

No one takes the right wing seriously.

We don't want the government to censor. We want the government to regulate censorship. Do you see the difference?

There is no difference here.

Corporations are people?

Quite the leap there, you sure you wanna go out on that limb?

 

[Tehon]

You are arguing from a right wing position.

No, I'm arguing from the constitutional position, which in this case is pretty much nonpartisan. Censorship is bad because no matter which side is engaged in it everybody eventually loses.

No one takes the right wing seriously.

We don't want the government to censor. We want the government to regulate censorship. Do you see the difference?

There is no difference here.

Corporations are people?

Quite the leap there, you sure you wanna go out on that limb?

Sure you don't want to answer the question, right winger?

 

[Confounding]

Of course I see it. What I don't see is anyone insisting that Infowars give equal time.

I can't stand that idiot Alex Jones, but he shouldn't have been silenced on social media. Who's next? It's a dangerous precedent. What if that dog turns around and starts biting at the left someday?

 

[Crepitus]

No, I'm arguing from the constitutional position, which in this case is pretty much nonpartisan. Censorship is bad because no matter which side is engaged in it everybody eventually loses.

No one takes the right wing seriously.

We don't want the government to censor. We want the government to regulate censorship. Do you see the difference?

There is no difference here.

Corporations are people?

Quite the leap there, you sure you wanna go out on that limb?

Sure you don't want to answer the question, right winger?

No, corporations are not people. I don't see what that has to do with what we are discussing though.

Also, that will be my last response to you. We are supposed to be team mates here but one little disagreement and you degenerate into name-calling.

Have a nice day, and think about improving your attitude.

 

[Crepitus]

Of course I see it. What I don't see is anyone insisting that Infowars give equal time.

I can't stand that idiot Alex Jones, but he shouldn't have been silenced on social media. Who's next? It's a dangerous precedent. What if that dog turns around and starts biting at the left someday?

If someone on left starts posting blatant lies and hate speech then they should be. TOS applies to everyone.

 

[Tehon]

No one takes the right wing seriously.

We don't want the government to censor. We want the government to regulate censorship. Do you see the difference?

There is no difference here.

Corporations are people?

Quite the leap there, you sure you wanna go out on that limb?

Sure you don't want to answer the question, right winger?

No, corporations are not people. I don't see what that has to do with what we are discussing though.

Also, that will be my last response to you. We are supposed to be team mates here but one little disagreement and you degenerate into name-calling.

Have a nice day, and think about improving your attitude.

It has everything to do with it if you are going to claim that regulating censorship perpetrated by corporations is itself censorship.

I don't want to be a dick, but we need to keep it real. I'm not interested in giving private capital the keys to the social commons, I don't give a hoot what their political leanings are. You should rethink your position.

 

[Confounding]

If someone on left starts posting blatant lies and hate speech then they should be. TOS applies to everyone.

I'm not pro-censorship so I guess we won't see eye to eye. In my view social media is getting big enough in politics for demands for free speech to be reasonable. I think you don't care because of political bias. We can't allow giant corporations to gain more ability to silence what they see as wrong think. It's dangerous.