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

[Fang]

I agree with regulating. If I search for something on Google I want to be sure I get honest results and not something biased. Google has become essential to everyday life. Just make sure there's a level playing field for everyone. I'm not as concerned with Facebook. I think FB will go the way of MySpace in the next decade. At the same time the Government should pass a law prohibiting Bing from existing.

 

[JGalt]

Printed media is largely unregulated, and you can print anything as long as you don't slander anyone. Broadcast media is regulated by the FCC, whose rules are supposed to guarantee "equal time", the "right of rebuttal", and "fairness". The FCC doesn't regulate cable content.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I agree with regulating. If I search for something on Google I want to be sure I get honest results and not something biased. Google has become essential to everyday life. Just make sure there's a level playing field for everyone. I'm not as concerned with Facebook. I think FB will go the way of MySpace in the next decade. At the same time the Government should pass a law prohibiting Bing from existing.

What's wrong with Bing?

Nobody has to use Google. Nobody has to use Facebook. I heard on the radio yesterday that Facebook has over 2 billion subscribers. I find that hard to believe, but if so, they aren't going anywhere.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Regulate??!! I thought he was a conservative!

the never ending hypocrisy of the entire Trump Cartel and its mindless drones boggles the mind.

conservative isnt the correct name for the sorry sob's.

For crying out loud, we're talking about one guy; another story of "anonymous" sources again.

One guy very high up in this admin. The treasonous fat senile old orange clown listens to Bannon, so there is fire beneath this smoke.

Until Trump says something that reflects what Bannon is saying, it's just one mans opinion and nothing more. Most conservatives don't value more government in anything. We value less government.

 

[JGalt]

I agree with regulating. If I search for something on Google I want to be sure I get honest results and not something biased. Google has become essential to everyday life. Just make sure there's a level playing field for everyone. I'm not as concerned with Facebook. I think FB will go the way of MySpace in the next decade. At the same time the Government should pass a law prohibiting Bing from existing.

What's wrong with Bing?

Nobody has to use Google. Nobody has to use Facebook. I heard on the radio yesterday that Facebook has over 2 billion subscribers. I find that hard to believe, but if so, they aren't going anywhere.

I quit using Google search when Bing came out. I still use Google for image searches because they're faster, but not for information.

There's a huge difference between the content when using Google and Bing, Google mostly leaning to the left. Plus the fact that Google always seems to put globalist bullshit themes at the top of their page on Christmas and Memorial Day.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I agree with regulating. If I search for something on Google I want to be sure I get honest results and not something biased. Google has become essential to everyday life. Just make sure there's a level playing field for everyone. I'm not as concerned with Facebook. I think FB will go the way of MySpace in the next decade. At the same time the Government should pass a law prohibiting Bing from existing.

What's wrong with Bing?

Nobody has to use Google. Nobody has to use Facebook. I heard on the radio yesterday that Facebook has over 2 billion subscribers. I find that hard to believe, but if so, they aren't going anywhere.

I quit using Google search when Bing came out. I still use Google for image searches because they're faster, but not for information.

There's a huge difference between the content when using Google and Bing, Google mostly leaning to the left. Plus the fact that Google always seems to put globalist bullshit themes at the top of their page on Christmas and Memorial Day.

I agree and it's been well documented. Google denies it of course, but even though liberal, they should be free to do whatever they want. We don't need regulation of them or anybody else on the internet. The one nice thing about the internet is little government involvement.

 

[Derelict_Drvr]

Broadcast media is regulated by the FCC, whose rules are supposed to guarantee "equal time", the "right of rebuttal", and "fairness". The FCC doesn't regulate cable content.

The Fairness Doctrine should not be confused with the equal-time rule. The Fairness Doctrine deals with discussion of controversial issues, while the equal-time rule deals only with political candidates.

...

In 1985, under FCC Chairman Mark S. Fowler, a communications attorney who had served on Ronald Reagan's presidential campaign staff in 1976 and 1980, the FCC released a report stating that the doctrine hurt the public interest and violated free speech rights guaranteed by the First Amendment.

In 1986, the 99th Congress directed the FCC to examine alternatives to the Fairness Doctrine and to submit a report to Congress on the subject.[16]

In August 1987, under FCC Chairman Dennis R. Patrick, the FCC abolished the doctrine by a 4-0 vote, in the Syracuse Peace Council decision, which was upheld by a panel of the Appeals Court for the D.C. Circuit in February 1989, though the Court stated in their decision that they made "that determination without reaching the constitutional issue."[17] The FCC suggested in Syracuse Peace Council that because of the many media voices in the marketplace, the doctrine be deemed unconstitutional, stating that:

Fairness Doctrine - Wikipedia


The Fairness Doctrine, created in 1949, was in direct violation of the 1st Amendment and was repealed in 1987.

The reason it was repealed was because there many multiple of place for people to get opposing points of view, unlike in 1949 when there were only 3 outlets for news and views, CBS, NBC, & ABC.

With today's myriad of print, broadcast, cable, and internet websites, something like "The Fairness Doctrine" is not needed.

As for the post topic, I voted to leave them alone. If Facebook or Google are allowing criminal activity on their sites there are state and federal laws on the books to deal with it.

If governments can't deal with unsavory activity, market forces will.

 

[Derelict_Drvr]

I agree with regulating. If I search for something on Google I want to be sure I get honest results and not something biased. Google has become essential to everyday life. Just make sure there's a level playing field for everyone. I'm not as concerned with Facebook. I think FB will go the way of MySpace in the next decade. At the same time the Government should pass a law prohibiting Bing from existing.

What's wrong with Bing?

Nobody has to use Google. Nobody has to use Facebook. I heard on the radio yesterday that Facebook has over 2 billion subscribers. I find that hard to believe, but if so, they aren't going anywhere.

Not hard to believe since there are more internet websites worldwide than the Earth's population. That's the main reason we have run out of IPv4 addresses and now have IPv6 that has 340x10(36) [340 undecillion] addresses.

The IPv6 address space is 128-bits 2(128) in size, containing 340,282,366,920,938,463,463,374,607,431,768,211,456 IPv6 addresses.

To give some perspective, it is worth noting that there are 4,294,967,296 IPv4 addresses in total, significantly less than the number of IPv6 addresses.

Understanding IP Addressing and CIDR Charts — RIPE Network Coordination Centre

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I agree with regulating. If I search for something on Google I want to be sure I get honest results and not something biased. Google has become essential to everyday life. Just make sure there's a level playing field for everyone. I'm not as concerned with Facebook. I think FB will go the way of MySpace in the next decade. At the same time the Government should pass a law prohibiting Bing from existing.

In this context what on Earth does "honest results" mean?

 

[percysunshine]

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.

 

[StevenC]

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

Good idea or bad?

Report: Steve Bannon Wants Google, Facebook to Be Regulated Like Utilities - Breitbart

Bad idea. I don't accept the story though as it is based on anonymous sources. More BS to me.

 

[Darkwind]

If the story is true, then Bannon needs to have a backhand to the lip for being so stupid.

 

[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.

 

[AsianTrumpSupporter]

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.

I think it's a stretch to call them utilities, but I agree that they are growing monopolistic. Same goes for Amazon and Time Warner.

 

[dcbl]

no, that's all right

the gubmint already has MORE than enough to do

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

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

Good idea or bad?

Report: Steve Bannon Wants Google, Facebook to Be Regulated Like Utilities - Breitbart

That Bannon and most others on the right have nothing but a fear of, and contempt for, Americans’ access to information comes as no surprise.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

FDR would be proud.

Nah, fear of access to an open expression of ideas and information is conservative shtick.

 

[JGalt]

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

Good idea or bad?

Report: Steve Bannon Wants Google, Facebook to Be Regulated Like Utilities - Breitbart

That Bannon and most others on the right have nothing but a fear of, and contempt for, Americans’ access to information comes as no surprise.

Access to information isn't the same as spreading lies and disinformation. The First Amendment doesn't give one the right to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

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.

Or leave them alone entirely because they're private property and they're not harming anybody.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

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.

I think it's a stretch to call them utilities, but I agree that they are growing monopolistic. Same goes for Amazon and Time Warner.

How can they be monopolistic when they compete with each other?