Trump considers panel to review complaints of anticonservative bias on social media

[Crepitus]

If you've had any bias, let the WH know. Social media is clearly biased. It's insulting to ones intelligence for them to suggest otherwise. Whether conservative, a supporter of Trump or just "controversial' (especially if it is against the alt-left mantra), social media is silencing you in one form or another if you start to become popular.

Trump considers panel to review complaints of anticonservative bias on social media

WASHINGTON — President Trump is considering establishing a panel to review complaints of anticonservative bias on social media, according to people familiar with the matter, in a move that would likely draw pushback from technology companies and others.


The plans are still under discussion but could include the establishment of a White House-created commission that would examine allegations of online bias and censorship, these people said. The administration could also encourage similar reviews by federal regulatory agencies, such as the Federal Communications Commission and the Federal Election Commission, they said.

“Left-wing bias in the tech world is a concern that definitely needs to be addressed from our vantage point, and at least exposed [so] that Americans have clear eyes about what we’re dealing with,” a White House official said.

Mr. Trump has long expressed that viewpoint, and in a recent Twitter post indicated that a plan to address complaints of bias is in the works.

Donald J. Trump
✔@realDonaldTrump


The Radical Left is in total command & control of Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and Google. The Administration is working to remedy this illegal situation. Stay tuned, and send names & events. Thank you Michelle! https://twitter.com/af_clips/status/1261331113102004226 …
102K
7:56 AM - May 16, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy

57.2K people are talking about this


Facebook Inc., which also owns Instagram, defended its practices when asked for a response to the nascent proposal.

“People on both sides of the aisle disagree with some of the positions we’ve taken, but we remain committed to seeking outside perspectives and communicating clearly about why we make the decisions we do,” the company said.

They can consider all they want. They can't do anything about private platforms.

You wouldn't want them to anyway. If they did you could kiss most of your "news" sources goodbye in fairly short order.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Seems like Trump is the one trying to censor how Google does business. Hate speech and white supremacist groups do not have to be the flavor of the day on a private platform.

Do you honestly believe Donald Trump is the only person that wants social media giants to stop
discriminating against non leftist entities? Or are you just that amazingly uninformed?
Did you know Elizabeth Warren has called for the breakup of Big Tech monopolies? I'll bet not!

Congress granted big tech social media companies exemptions and special carve-outs so they could
dominate public spaces but only with the provision that they not discriminate against conservative voices (your reference to white supremacist groups is a clumsy blatant red herring designed to conflate conservative voices with fascist alt-right voices. I'm sure this didn't happen by accident).

If Facebook won't play be the rules they were given their advantages under then they should surrender their
monopoly immediately and let other voices be heard. Period! Inform yourself before mouthing off.

 

[OldLady]

A charge of censorship can only be leveled against government, not private entities. Even if this were not true, there is no cogent and consistent definition of "conservativism" to work from.

I am not on social media, but the owners/operators are free to set up their own rules, like prohibiting comments that incite violence or revenge porn or those that simply are blame rants against some demographic group.

This is the common flaw in every single post defending the social media giants....they are private businesses
so they get to run their affairs as they see fit. If you don't like it leave.

Whether through ignorance or just a lack of honesty what always gets omitted is the fact that yes, Facebook
or YouTube, etc. are private businesses but they are the sorts of businesses that have been granted
a monopoly status by Congress (just like baseball) and Congress is unlikely to fix their mess without
real pressure from the mostly ignorant or apathetic public.

Making the antitrust case against Facebook, a new kind of monopoly

There is a difference between dominance through awesomeness and illegal monopolistic activity.

qz.com

Educate yourself so you can fix your own erroneous assumptions. Facebook should stop discrimniating
against one half of the political spectrum or lose their cushy little monopoly they should never have had
to begin with. I'm betting you don't educate yourself, by the way.

Really? It's a monopoly? No one else can have a FB-type site?

 

[colfax_m]

The poor sensitive snowflakes.

Sad.

YOU'RE the sensitive snowflake, mentally challenged one.

The snowflakes are the ones putting together a committee because they had their feelings hurt by Twitter.

 

[bluzman61]

The poor sensitive snowflakes.

Sad.

YOU'RE the sensitive snowflake, mentally challenged one.

The snowflakes are the ones putting together a committee because they had their feelings hurt by Twitter.

And YOU are a MAJOR snowflake, ya dickhead. Quick, run to your Safe Space, asshole!

 

[OldLady]

your reference to white supremacist groups is a clumsy blatant red herring designed to conflate conservative voices with fascist alt-right voices I'm sure this didn't happen by accident).

Those kind of groups are the only ones I know of that are taken down. That and posts or sites that promote violence.

 

[bluzman61]

Seems like Trump is the one trying to censor how Google does business. Hate speech and white supremacist groups do not have to be the flavor of the day on a private platform.

Do you honestly believe Donald Trump is the only person that wants social media giants to stop
discriminating against non leftist entities? Or are you just that amazingly uninformed?
Did you know Elizabeth Warren has called for the breakup of Big Tech monopolies? I'll bet not!

Congress granted big tech social media companies exemptions and special carve-outs so they could
dominate public spaces but only with the provision that they not discriminate against conservative voices (your reference to white supremacist groups is a clumsy blatant red herring designed to conflate conservative voices with fascist alt-right voices. I'm sure this didn't happen by accident).

If Facebook won't play be the rules they were given their advantages under then they should surrender their
monopoly immediately and let other voices be heard. Period! Inform yourself before mouthing off.

Unfortunately, Old Lady IS a bit dim. I believe the senility is creeping up on her.............

 

[colfax_m]

The poor sensitive snowflakes.

Sad.

YOU'RE the sensitive snowflake, mentally challenged one.

The snowflakes are the ones putting together a committee because they had their feelings hurt by Twitter.

And YOU are a MAJOR snowflake, ya dickhead. Quick, run to your Safe Space, asshole!

Careful. I may have to lodge a complaint because of your verbal abuse with Trump’s snowflake committee.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Really? It's a monopoly? No one else can have a FB-type site?

Facebook Is a Threat to Democracy Itself

Mark Zuckerberg’s social media behemoth holds immense—and seemingly unaccountable—power on a global scale. It’s time for serious reforms that lay the foundation for a true tech democracy.

www.opensocietyfoundations.org

Why don't you do the slightest bit of research instead of clogging up the thread with your uninformed
stupidity?

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Careful. I may have to lodge a complaint because of your verbal abuse with Trump’s snowflake committee.

And your typical knee jerk reactionary stupidity isn't helpful either.

"Not long ago, Zuckerberg and his fellow tech platform pioneers were hailed as heroes. But the immense and unchecked power of these platforms has become untenable, as evidenced by the growing concern on both sides of the aisle. As Cory Doctorow, the famed blogger, author, and special advisor to the Electronic Frontier Foundation describes it, what could have been a technological democracy has become more of a constitutional monarchy. Through acquisitions and market consolidation, a handful of companies have become behemoths too big to be effectively regulated—online giants that function as de facto state monopolies, blinded by their successes to the impact of their actions. " Facebook Is a Threat to Democracy Itself

 

[colfax_m]

Careful. I may have to lodge a complaint because of your verbal abuse with Trump’s snowflake committee.

And your typical knee jerk reactionary stupidity isn't helpful either.

"Not long ago, Zuckerberg and his fellow tech platform pioneers were hailed as heroes. But the immense and unchecked power of these platforms has become untenable, as evidenced by the growing concern on both sides of the aisle. As Cory Doctorow, the famed blogger, author, and special advisor to the Electronic Frontier Foundation describes it, what could have been a technological democracy has become more of a constitutional monarchy. Through acquisitions and market consolidation, a handful of companies have become behemoths too big to be effectively regulated—online giants that function as de facto state monopolies, blinded by their successes to the impact of their actions. "

I don’t adhere to the believe that Facebook is unstoppable. The internet is the most dynamic place in the world. Facebook needs transparency, but it does not need to be treated like a typical monopoly.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

I don’t adhere to the believe that Facebook is unstoppable. The internet is the most dynamic place in the world. Facebook needs transparency, but it does not need to be treated like a typical monopoly.

Why doesn't it? If it acts like a monopoly and has all the advantages of a monopoly it should be treated like a monopoly. Read the citations I provided and you may discover something yet.
Some of the loudest voices calling for Facebook and other Big Tech giants to be broken up are not, gasp, conservative voices though conservatives are indeed calling for an end to discrimination and thought control
by Big Technocatic fascists. Read something for once.

 

[colfax_m]

I don’t adhere to the believe that Facebook is unstoppable. The internet is the most dynamic place in the world. Facebook needs transparency, but it does not need to be treated like a typical monopoly.

Why doesn't it? If it acts like a monopoly and has all the advantages of a monopoly it should be treated like a monopoly. Read the citations I provided and you may discover something yet.
Some of the loudest voices calling for Facebook and other Big Tech giants to be broken up are not, gasp, conservative voices though conservatives are indeed calling for an end to discrimination and thought control
by Big Technocatic fascists. Read something for once.

Because it can’t control the internet. The internet is decentralized. No company can control it.

 

[OldLady]

conservatives are indeed calling for an end to discrimination and thought control
by Big Technocatic fascists.

These are the Community Standards:
Authenticity: We want to make sure the content people are seeing on Facebook is authentic. We believe that authenticity creates a better environment for sharing, and that’s why we don’t want people using Facebook to misrepresent who they are or what they’re doing.
Safety: We are committed to making Facebook a safe place. Expression that threatens people has the potential to intimidate, exclude or silence others and isn’t allowed on Facebook.
Dignity: We believe that all people are equal in dignity and rights. We expect that people will respect the dignity of others and not harass or degrade others.

Facebook Community Standards | Transparency Center

The Facebook Community Standards outline what is and isn't allowed on Facebook.

www.facebook.com

So don't threaten people, post fake news or disrespect others. If you can't handle that, there's always USMB.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Because it can’t control the internet. The internet is decentralized. No company can control it.

Explain my citation then. Why are all these organizations interested in defending personal liberties calling
for Facebook to be broken up for the good of "democracy itself"?
What do you know that all these experts have gotten wrong?

No one is saying Facebook can control all of the internet! That's your own ignorance shouting and drowning
out all intelligent discourse.

 

[colfax_m]

Because it can’t control the internet. The internet is decentralized. No company can control it.

Explain my citation then. Why are all these organizations interested in defending personal liberties calling
for Facebook to be broken up for the good of "democracy itself"?
What do you know that all these experts have gotten wrong?

Because challenging Facebook in the marketplace is hard and they want someone else to do it for them.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

So Trump is upset that more people on social media dislike him than those that like him. How is that going to work? Is he going to force people that don't like him to write nice things about him? Who is going to decide which people are forced to write nice things about him to make it all even? Wouldn't it be easier for him to just stop doing such stupid things so more people would like him?

That is not remotely what the OP says. What fantasy world do you live it? It has nothing to do with Trump. My friend was banned from Twitter for being pro Israel and posting factual pro Israel data. Puzzling to him as he said Twitter didn’t mind seeing anti Israel and pro Palestine posts. This to me is fine but then Twitter needs to be registered as a content provider vs content disseminator. Cannot have it both ways.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

If you've had any bias, let the WH know. Social media is clearly biased. It's insulting to ones intelligence for them to suggest otherwise. Whether conservative, a supporter of Trump or just "controversial' (especially if it is against the alt-left mantra), social media is silencing you in one form or another if you start to become popular.

Trump considers panel to review complaints of anticonservative bias on social media

WASHINGTON — President Trump is considering establishing a panel to review complaints of anticonservative bias on social media, according to people familiar with the matter, in a move that would likely draw pushback from technology companies and others.


The plans are still under discussion but could include the establishment of a White House-created commission that would examine allegations of online bias and censorship, these people said. The administration could also encourage similar reviews by federal regulatory agencies, such as the Federal Communications Commission and the Federal Election Commission, they said.

“Left-wing bias in the tech world is a concern that definitely needs to be addressed from our vantage point, and at least exposed [so] that Americans have clear eyes about what we’re dealing with,” a White House official said.

Mr. Trump has long expressed that viewpoint, and in a recent Twitter post indicated that a plan to address complaints of bias is in the works.

Donald J. Trump
✔@realDonaldTrump


The Radical Left is in total command & control of Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and Google. The Administration is working to remedy this illegal situation. Stay tuned, and send names & events. Thank you Michelle! https://twitter.com/af_clips/status/1261331113102004226 …
102K
7:56 AM - May 16, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy

57.2K people are talking about this


Facebook Inc., which also owns Instagram, defended its practices when asked for a response to the nascent proposal.

“People on both sides of the aisle disagree with some of the positions we’ve taken, but we remain committed to seeking outside perspectives and communicating clearly about why we make the decisions we do,” the company said.

They can consider all they want. They can't do anything about private platforms.

You wouldn't want them to anyway. If they did you could kiss most of your "news" sources goodbye in fairly short order.

They can. Read my post.

 

[colfax_m]

So Trump is upset that more people on social media dislike him than those that like him. How is that going to work? Is he going to force people that don't like him to write nice things about him? Who is going to decide which people are forced to write nice things about him to make it all even? Wouldn't it be easier for him to just stop doing such stupid things so more people would like him?

That is not remotely what the OP says. What fantasy world do you live it? It has nothing to do with Trump. My friend was banned from Twitter for being pro Israel and posting factual pro Israel data. Puzzling to him as he said Twitter didn’t mind seeing anti Israel and pro Palestine posts. This to me is fine but then Twitter needs to be registered as a content provider vs content disseminator. Cannot have it both ways.

Is a book store a content provider or content disseminator?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

So Trump is upset that more people on social media dislike him than those that like him. How is that going to work? Is he going to force people that don't like him to write nice things about him? Who is going to decide which people are forced to write nice things about him to make it all even? Wouldn't it be easier for him to just stop doing such stupid things so more people would like him?

That is not remotely what the OP says. What fantasy world do you live it? It has nothing to do with Trump. My friend was banned from Twitter for being pro Israel and posting factual pro Israel data. Puzzling to him as he said Twitter didn’t mind seeing anti Israel and pro Palestine posts. This to me is fine but then Twitter needs to be registered as a content provider vs content disseminator. Cannot have it both ways.

Is a book store a content provider or content disseminator?

Depends. Twitter says they are like AT&T... we just deliver what people say. If you call me a moonbat over the phone AT&T doesn’t block that. Twitter may so they aren’t like AT&T they are more like The NY Times. Generic bookstore is a disseminator like AT&T. They also don’t ban people from coming in and out.