Well well look what we have hear

[mudwhistle]

Orwell was trying to warn us about Trump.

He was warning us about both of you

"1984" warning was against totalitarianism, and political repression. "Animal Farm" was Orwell's warning against communism - All the animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.

I've read the books. Describes you to a tee.

Well you misread Orwell then. His concern was liberalism being coopted by communism. What you're bitching about is a supposedly liberal censorship of conservatism. That's not what's happening, but that was Eagle's OP.

It "could" happen. But what twitter did was to tell the Federalist to remove Federalist content urging people to get infected, and infect others with Corvid. It's not clear what google did, but it appears they told Federalist to remove racist comments to a Federalist posting. And the zero hedge was the same thing, although zero hedge may have created the racist posting themselves … they have track record for that.

Liberals don't believe in censorship.
Communists and fascists do.
The problem here is the left isn't liberal anymore. They call themselves progressives which is another word for communists. Social Democrats are also communists.

This isn’t censorship.

If that's the case then I'm the King of Luxembourg. Feel free to kiss my ring.

 

[colfax_m]

Progs have endless amounts of resources from globalists on down.

Yes, and some conservatives feel like they have a right to use those resources.

Which is oddly socialist of you.

 

[mudwhistle]

No one is attacking their free speech.

NBC seems to be.

NBC does not have the ability to attack free speech.

No....they just get their buds in Google to do it.

Google isn’t stopping any speech.

They're using alorythms to prevent searches....thus stifling free expression. Been doing this for years.

That doesn’t stifle expression. We have right to free speech. We don’t have a right to an audience.

Huh, that's what we said about commie Kaepernick but people think his RIGHTS were infringed. Even though he was never put into any gulag I am aware of.

Ahhhh, but a negro multi millionaire cultural marxist should be able to express his commie views. You know, just as anyone is allowed to the N WORRRRD at work, right?

On top of being ignorant about everything, you are hypocritical about everything, but hollywood agrees with you. So, that is all that matters.

Idiots.

No one is attacking their free speech.

NBC seems to be.

NBC does not have the ability to attack free speech.

No....they just get their buds in Google to do it.

Google isn’t stopping any speech.

They're using alorythms to prevent searches....thus stifling free expression. Been doing this for years.

That doesn’t stifle expression. We have right to free speech. We don’t have a right to an audience.

Google lied to Congress and said that their search engine isn't conducting censorship....which helps the left mislead people that use their service.
Is this America or is it Cuba?
Apparently they want another Cuba.
To think they claimed Russia was influencing the election, but Google, Twitter, and Fakebook put Russia to shame.

what are you going to do? Arrest them for not being supportive enough of Teump?

Because that’s exactly the third world corruption I’d expect from this administration.

They received immunity from lawsuits as long as they agreed not to edit material or practice censorship. That would reclassify them as publishers like the New York Times. Since they have practiced censorship and edited their content according to their political ideology, they aren't a public domain anymore. They are publishers which opens them up to lawsuits.

The topic your brought up really doesn’t have much to do with the topic of the thread, which is about Google Adsense.

It has everything to do with it. Google is trying to attack web sites they don't agree with politically. They think they can get away with shutting down the revenue source of their political enemies. Sort of the way Obama used the IRS to harass conservative fundraising. It all amounts to a thugocracy run by leftists in social media. It's harassment and actionable in court.

Which has nothing to do with section 230. Section 230 says a website can not be held accountable for material posted on their website by other users. That’s not the issue here. The issue is whether Google has a right to refuse to let The Federalist participate in their advertiser program.

What grounds makes this actionable in court?

There is a dollar amount evolved. The site can prove damages.

So? If your boss fires you for being drunk on the job, you can prove financial damages too.

That doesn’t make them liable for those damages.

Google doesn't have the right to dictate content to The Federalist. So your example is moot. Showing up to work drunk is one thing. Publishing free expression is something else.

Google isn’t dictating content. They have the right to chose not to work with some people.

They also have the right to be sued accordingly

 

[colfax_m]

Orwell was trying to warn us about Trump.

He was warning us about both of you

"1984" warning was against totalitarianism, and political repression. "Animal Farm" was Orwell's warning against communism - All the animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.

I've read the books. Describes you to a tee.

Well you misread Orwell then. His concern was liberalism being coopted by communism. What you're bitching about is a supposedly liberal censorship of conservatism. That's not what's happening, but that was Eagle's OP.

It "could" happen. But what twitter did was to tell the Federalist to remove Federalist content urging people to get infected, and infect others with Corvid. It's not clear what google did, but it appears they told Federalist to remove racist comments to a Federalist posting. And the zero hedge was the same thing, although zero hedge may have created the racist posting themselves … they have track record for that.

Liberals don't believe in censorship.
Communists and fascists do.
The problem here is the left isn't liberal anymore. They call themselves progressives which is another word for communists. Social Democrats are also communists.

This isn’t censorship.

If that's the case then I'm the King of Luxembourg. Feel free to kiss my ring.

So what’s your demand? Force Google to give money to The Federalist? That’s lovely.

 

[colfax_m]

No one is attacking their free speech.

NBC seems to be.

NBC does not have the ability to attack free speech.

No....they just get their buds in Google to do it.

Google isn’t stopping any speech.

They're using alorythms to prevent searches....thus stifling free expression. Been doing this for years.

That doesn’t stifle expression. We have right to free speech. We don’t have a right to an audience.

Huh, that's what we said about commie Kaepernick but people think his RIGHTS were infringed. Even though he was never put into any gulag I am aware of.

Ahhhh, but a negro multi millionaire cultural marxist should be able to express his commie views. You know, just as anyone is allowed to the N WORRRRD at work, right?

On top of being ignorant about everything, you are hypocritical about everything, but hollywood agrees with you. So, that is all that matters.

Idiots.

No one is attacking their free speech.

NBC seems to be.

NBC does not have the ability to attack free speech.

No....they just get their buds in Google to do it.

Google isn’t stopping any speech.

They're using alorythms to prevent searches....thus stifling free expression. Been doing this for years.

That doesn’t stifle expression. We have right to free speech. We don’t have a right to an audience.

Google lied to Congress and said that their search engine isn't conducting censorship....which helps the left mislead people that use their service.
Is this America or is it Cuba?
Apparently they want another Cuba.
To think they claimed Russia was influencing the election, but Google, Twitter, and Fakebook put Russia to shame.

what are you going to do? Arrest them for not being supportive enough of Teump?

Because that’s exactly the third world corruption I’d expect from this administration.

They received immunity from lawsuits as long as they agreed not to edit material or practice censorship. That would reclassify them as publishers like the New York Times. Since they have practiced censorship and edited their content according to their political ideology, they aren't a public domain anymore. They are publishers which opens them up to lawsuits.

The topic your brought up really doesn’t have much to do with the topic of the thread, which is about Google Adsense.

It has everything to do with it. Google is trying to attack web sites they don't agree with politically. They think they can get away with shutting down the revenue source of their political enemies. Sort of the way Obama used the IRS to harass conservative fundraising. It all amounts to a thugocracy run by leftists in social media. It's harassment and actionable in court.

Which has nothing to do with section 230. Section 230 says a website can not be held accountable for material posted on their website by other users. That’s not the issue here. The issue is whether Google has a right to refuse to let The Federalist participate in their advertiser program.

What grounds makes this actionable in court?

There is a dollar amount evolved. The site can prove damages.

So? If your boss fires you for being drunk on the job, you can prove financial damages too.

That doesn’t make them liable for those damages.

Google doesn't have the right to dictate content to The Federalist. So your example is moot. Showing up to work drunk is one thing. Publishing free expression is something else.

Google isn’t dictating content. They have the right to chose not to work with some people.

They also have the right to be sued accordingly

On what grounds?

 

[mudwhistle]

Progs have endless amounts of resources from globalists on down.

Yes, and some conservatives feel like they have a right to use those resources.

Which is oddly socialist of you.

I don't think that word means what you think it means.
Socialism is government ownership of business.
I think big social media is abusing their authority hoping for a government takeover. If not, they're ******* idiots. Lmao

 

[mudwhistle]

No one is attacking their free speech.

NBC seems to be.

NBC does not have the ability to attack free speech.

No....they just get their buds in Google to do it.

Google isn’t stopping any speech.

They're using alorythms to prevent searches....thus stifling free expression. Been doing this for years.

That doesn’t stifle expression. We have right to free speech. We don’t have a right to an audience.

Huh, that's what we said about commie Kaepernick but people think his RIGHTS were infringed. Even though he was never put into any gulag I am aware of.

Ahhhh, but a negro multi millionaire cultural marxist should be able to express his commie views. You know, just as anyone is allowed to the N WORRRRD at work, right?

On top of being ignorant about everything, you are hypocritical about everything, but hollywood agrees with you. So, that is all that matters.

Idiots.

No one is attacking their free speech.

NBC seems to be.

NBC does not have the ability to attack free speech.

No....they just get their buds in Google to do it.

Google isn’t stopping any speech.

They're using alorythms to prevent searches....thus stifling free expression. Been doing this for years.

That doesn’t stifle expression. We have right to free speech. We don’t have a right to an audience.

Google lied to Congress and said that their search engine isn't conducting censorship....which helps the left mislead people that use their service.
Is this America or is it Cuba?
Apparently they want another Cuba.
To think they claimed Russia was influencing the election, but Google, Twitter, and Fakebook put Russia to shame.

what are you going to do? Arrest them for not being supportive enough of Teump?

Because that’s exactly the third world corruption I’d expect from this administration.

They received immunity from lawsuits as long as they agreed not to edit material or practice censorship. That would reclassify them as publishers like the New York Times. Since they have practiced censorship and edited their content according to their political ideology, they aren't a public domain anymore. They are publishers which opens them up to lawsuits.

The topic your brought up really doesn’t have much to do with the topic of the thread, which is about Google Adsense.

It has everything to do with it. Google is trying to attack web sites they don't agree with politically. They think they can get away with shutting down the revenue source of their political enemies. Sort of the way Obama used the IRS to harass conservative fundraising. It all amounts to a thugocracy run by leftists in social media. It's harassment and actionable in court.

Which has nothing to do with section 230. Section 230 says a website can not be held accountable for material posted on their website by other users. That’s not the issue here. The issue is whether Google has a right to refuse to let The Federalist participate in their advertiser program.

What grounds makes this actionable in court?

There is a dollar amount evolved. The site can prove damages.

So? If your boss fires you for being drunk on the job, you can prove financial damages too.

That doesn’t make them liable for those damages.

Google doesn't have the right to dictate content to The Federalist. So your example is moot. Showing up to work drunk is one thing. Publishing free expression is something else.

Google isn’t dictating content. They have the right to chose not to work with some people.

They also have the right to be sued accordingly

On what grounds?

Harassment.

 

[colfax_m]

No one is attacking their free speech.

NBC seems to be.

NBC does not have the ability to attack free speech.

No....they just get their buds in Google to do it.

Google isn’t stopping any speech.

They're using alorythms to prevent searches....thus stifling free expression. Been doing this for years.

That doesn’t stifle expression. We have right to free speech. We don’t have a right to an audience.

Huh, that's what we said about commie Kaepernick but people think his RIGHTS were infringed. Even though he was never put into any gulag I am aware of.

Ahhhh, but a negro multi millionaire cultural marxist should be able to express his commie views. You know, just as anyone is allowed to the N WORRRRD at work, right?

On top of being ignorant about everything, you are hypocritical about everything, but hollywood agrees with you. So, that is all that matters.

Idiots.

No one is attacking their free speech.

NBC seems to be.

NBC does not have the ability to attack free speech.

No....they just get their buds in Google to do it.

Google isn’t stopping any speech.

They're using alorythms to prevent searches....thus stifling free expression. Been doing this for years.

That doesn’t stifle expression. We have right to free speech. We don’t have a right to an audience.

Google lied to Congress and said that their search engine isn't conducting censorship....which helps the left mislead people that use their service.
Is this America or is it Cuba?
Apparently they want another Cuba.
To think they claimed Russia was influencing the election, but Google, Twitter, and Fakebook put Russia to shame.

what are you going to do? Arrest them for not being supportive enough of Teump?

Because that’s exactly the third world corruption I’d expect from this administration.

They received immunity from lawsuits as long as they agreed not to edit material or practice censorship. That would reclassify them as publishers like the New York Times. Since they have practiced censorship and edited their content according to their political ideology, they aren't a public domain anymore. They are publishers which opens them up to lawsuits.

The topic your brought up really doesn’t have much to do with the topic of the thread, which is about Google Adsense.

It has everything to do with it. Google is trying to attack web sites they don't agree with politically. They think they can get away with shutting down the revenue source of their political enemies. Sort of the way Obama used the IRS to harass conservative fundraising. It all amounts to a thugocracy run by leftists in social media. It's harassment and actionable in court.

Which has nothing to do with section 230. Section 230 says a website can not be held accountable for material posted on their website by other users. That’s not the issue here. The issue is whether Google has a right to refuse to let The Federalist participate in their advertiser program.

What grounds makes this actionable in court?

There is a dollar amount evolved. The site can prove damages.

So? If your boss fires you for being drunk on the job, you can prove financial damages too.

That doesn’t make them liable for those damages.

Google doesn't have the right to dictate content to The Federalist. So your example is moot. Showing up to work drunk is one thing. Publishing free expression is something else.

Google isn’t dictating content. They have the right to chose not to work with some people.

They also have the right to be sued accordingly

On what grounds?

Harassment.

Absolutely insane. If Google doesn’t want to anything to do with The Federalist, that’s literally the opposite of harassment.

 

[Marion Morrison]

No one is attacking their free speech.

NBC seems to be.

NBC does not have the ability to attack free speech.

No....they just get their buds in Google to do it.

Google isn’t stopping any speech.

They're using alorythms to prevent searches....thus stifling free expression. Been doing this for years.

That doesn’t stifle expression. We have right to free speech. We don’t have a right to an audience.

Huh, that's what we said about commie Kaepernick but people think his RIGHTS were infringed. Even though he was never put into any gulag I am aware of.

Ahhhh, but a negro multi millionaire cultural marxist should be able to express his commie views. You know, just as anyone is allowed to the N WORRRRD at work, right?

On top of being ignorant about everything, you are hypocritical about everything, but hollywood agrees with you. So, that is all that matters.

Idiots.

No one is attacking their free speech.

NBC seems to be.

NBC does not have the ability to attack free speech.

No....they just get their buds in Google to do it.

Google isn’t stopping any speech.

They're using alorythms to prevent searches....thus stifling free expression. Been doing this for years.

That doesn’t stifle expression. We have right to free speech. We don’t have a right to an audience.

Google lied to Congress and said that their search engine isn't conducting censorship....which helps the left mislead people that use their service.
Is this America or is it Cuba?
Apparently they want another Cuba.
To think they claimed Russia was influencing the election, but Google, Twitter, and Fakebook put Russia to shame.

what are you going to do? Arrest them for not being supportive enough of Teump?

Because that’s exactly the third world corruption I’d expect from this administration.

They received immunity from lawsuits as long as they agreed not to edit material or practice censorship. That would reclassify them as publishers like the New York Times. Since they have practiced censorship and edited their content according to their political ideology, they aren't a public domain anymore. They are publishers which opens them up to lawsuits.

The topic your brought up really doesn’t have much to do with the topic of the thread, which is about Google Adsense.

It has everything to do with it. Google is trying to attack web sites they don't agree with politically. They think they can get away with shutting down the revenue source of their political enemies. Sort of the way Obama used the IRS to harass conservative fundraising. It all amounts to a thugocracy run by leftists in social media. It's harassment and actionable in court.

Which has nothing to do with section 230. Section 230 says a website can not be held accountable for material posted on their website by other users. That’s not the issue here. The issue is whether Google has a right to refuse to let The Federalist participate in their advertiser program.

What grounds makes this actionable in court?

There is a dollar amount evolved. The site can prove damages.

So? If your boss fires you for being drunk on the job, you can prove financial damages too.

That doesn’t make them liable for those damages.

Google doesn't have the right to dictate content to The Federalist. So your example is moot. Showing up to work drunk is one thing. Publishing free expression is something else.

Google isn’t dictating content. They have the right to chose not to work with some people.

They also have the right to be sued accordingly

On what grounds?

Harassment.

Absolutely insane. If Google doesn’t want to anything to do with The Federalist, that’s literally the opposite of harassment.

But it's the epitome of bias.

 

[colfax_m]

No one is attacking their free speech.

NBC seems to be.

NBC does not have the ability to attack free speech.

No....they just get their buds in Google to do it.

Google isn’t stopping any speech.

They're using alorythms to prevent searches....thus stifling free expression. Been doing this for years.

That doesn’t stifle expression. We have right to free speech. We don’t have a right to an audience.

Huh, that's what we said about commie Kaepernick but people think his RIGHTS were infringed. Even though he was never put into any gulag I am aware of.

Ahhhh, but a negro multi millionaire cultural marxist should be able to express his commie views. You know, just as anyone is allowed to the N WORRRRD at work, right?

On top of being ignorant about everything, you are hypocritical about everything, but hollywood agrees with you. So, that is all that matters.

Idiots.

No one is attacking their free speech.

NBC seems to be.

NBC does not have the ability to attack free speech.

No....they just get their buds in Google to do it.

Google isn’t stopping any speech.

They're using alorythms to prevent searches....thus stifling free expression. Been doing this for years.

That doesn’t stifle expression. We have right to free speech. We don’t have a right to an audience.

Google lied to Congress and said that their search engine isn't conducting censorship....which helps the left mislead people that use their service.
Is this America or is it Cuba?
Apparently they want another Cuba.
To think they claimed Russia was influencing the election, but Google, Twitter, and Fakebook put Russia to shame.

what are you going to do? Arrest them for not being supportive enough of Teump?

Because that’s exactly the third world corruption I’d expect from this administration.

They received immunity from lawsuits as long as they agreed not to edit material or practice censorship. That would reclassify them as publishers like the New York Times. Since they have practiced censorship and edited their content according to their political ideology, they aren't a public domain anymore. They are publishers which opens them up to lawsuits.

The topic your brought up really doesn’t have much to do with the topic of the thread, which is about Google Adsense.

It has everything to do with it. Google is trying to attack web sites they don't agree with politically. They think they can get away with shutting down the revenue source of their political enemies. Sort of the way Obama used the IRS to harass conservative fundraising. It all amounts to a thugocracy run by leftists in social media. It's harassment and actionable in court.

Which has nothing to do with section 230. Section 230 says a website can not be held accountable for material posted on their website by other users. That’s not the issue here. The issue is whether Google has a right to refuse to let The Federalist participate in their advertiser program.

What grounds makes this actionable in court?

There is a dollar amount evolved. The site can prove damages.

So? If your boss fires you for being drunk on the job, you can prove financial damages too.

That doesn’t make them liable for those damages.

Google doesn't have the right to dictate content to The Federalist. So your example is moot. Showing up to work drunk is one thing. Publishing free expression is something else.

Google isn’t dictating content. They have the right to chose not to work with some people.

They also have the right to be sued accordingly

On what grounds?

Harassment.

Absolutely insane. If Google doesn’t want to anything to do with The Federalist, that’s literally the opposite of harassment.

But it's the epitome of bias.

Maybe. But that’s not Google’s problem.

 

[bendog]

Orwell was trying to warn us about Trump.

He was warning us about both of you

"1984" warning was against totalitarianism, and political repression. "Animal Farm" was Orwell's warning against communism - All the animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.

I've read the books. Describes you to a tee.

Well you misread Orwell then. His concern was liberalism being coopted by communism. What you're bitching about is a supposedly liberal censorship of conservatism. That's not what's happening, but that was Eagle's OP.

It "could" happen. But what twitter did was to tell the Federalist to remove Federalist content urging people to get infected, and infect others with Corvid. It's not clear what google did, but it appears they told Federalist to remove racist comments to a Federalist posting. And the zero hedge was the same thing, although zero hedge may have created the racist posting themselves … they have track record for that.

Liberals don't believe in censorship.
Communists and fascists do.
The problem here is the left isn't liberal anymore. They call themselves progressives which is another word for communists. Social Democrats are also communists.

This isn’t censorship.

 

[iceberg]

Orwell was trying to warn us about Trump.

He was warning us about both of you

"1984" warning was against totalitarianism, and political repression. "Animal Farm" was Orwell's warning against communism - All the animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.

I've read the books. Describes you to a tee.

Well you misread Orwell then. His concern was liberalism being coopted by communism. What you're bitching about is a supposedly liberal censorship of conservatism. That's not what's happening, but that was Eagle's OP.

It "could" happen. But what twitter did was to tell the Federalist to remove Federalist content urging people to get infected, and infect others with Corvid. It's not clear what google did, but it appears they told Federalist to remove racist comments to a Federalist posting. And the zero hedge was the same thing, although zero hedge may have created the racist posting themselves … they have track record for that.

Liberals don't believe in censorship.
Communists and fascists do.
The problem here is the left isn't liberal anymore. They call themselves progressives which is another word for communists. Social Democrats are also communists.

This isn’t censorship.

If that's the case then I'm the King of Luxembourg. Feel free to kiss my ring.

that's a cock-ring isn't it???

 

[bendog]

Thank God Battlin' William Barr and American Thinker stand Tall in their spurs protecting that precious First Amendment.

John Bolton’s Publisher Simon & Schuster: DOJ Lawsuit Is Latest Effort To Quash “Unflattering” Book About Donald Trump — Update

UPDATED with publisher's statement: Simon & Schuster, which is preparing to release John Bolton's memoir The Room Where It Happened, said that a Justice Department lawsuit is the latest effort by Donald Trump's administration to prevent publication of a book deemed unflattering to the president...

www.yahoo.com

 

[Blaine Sweeter]

A vast left-wing conspiracy suppressing conservative voices includes Google, NBC, and a shadowy foreign group

Remember when the progressive media feigned concern over foreign influence on our elections? Now, just months before a critical election, they are conspiring with foreign groups to destroy conservative publications, with the assistance of Google, the...

www.americanthinker.com

used to be back in the 1960s the left started the free speech movement. How things do change in the 21st century it seems.

Well, well, another Op-Ed mistaken for facts.

 

[iceberg]

No one is attacking their free speech.

NBC seems to be.

NBC does not have the ability to attack free speech.

No....they just get their buds in Google to do it.

Google isn’t stopping any speech.

They're using alorythms to prevent searches....thus stifling free expression. Been doing this for years.

That doesn’t stifle expression. We have right to free speech. We don’t have a right to an audience.

Huh, that's what we said about commie Kaepernick but people think his RIGHTS were infringed. Even though he was never put into any gulag I am aware of.

Ahhhh, but a negro multi millionaire cultural marxist should be able to express his commie views. You know, just as anyone is allowed to the N WORRRRD at work, right?

On top of being ignorant about everything, you are hypocritical about everything, but hollywood agrees with you. So, that is all that matters.

Idiots.

No one is attacking their free speech.

NBC seems to be.

NBC does not have the ability to attack free speech.

No....they just get their buds in Google to do it.

Google isn’t stopping any speech.

They're using alorythms to prevent searches....thus stifling free expression. Been doing this for years.

That doesn’t stifle expression. We have right to free speech. We don’t have a right to an audience.

Google lied to Congress and said that their search engine isn't conducting censorship....which helps the left mislead people that use their service.
Is this America or is it Cuba?
Apparently they want another Cuba.
To think they claimed Russia was influencing the election, but Google, Twitter, and Fakebook put Russia to shame.

what are you going to do? Arrest them for not being supportive enough of Teump?

Because that’s exactly the third world corruption I’d expect from this administration.

They received immunity from lawsuits as long as they agreed not to edit material or practice censorship. That would reclassify them as publishers like the New York Times. Since they have practiced censorship and edited their content according to their political ideology, they aren't a public domain anymore. They are publishers which opens them up to lawsuits.

The topic your brought up really doesn’t have much to do with the topic of the thread, which is about Google Adsense.

It has everything to do with it. Google is trying to attack web sites they don't agree with politically. They think they can get away with shutting down the revenue source of their political enemies. Sort of the way Obama used the IRS to harass conservative fundraising. It all amounts to a thugocracy run by leftists in social media. It's harassment and actionable in court.

Which has nothing to do with section 230. Section 230 says a website can not be held accountable for material posted on their website by other users. That’s not the issue here. The issue is whether Google has a right to refuse to let The Federalist participate in their advertiser program.

What grounds makes this actionable in court?

There is a dollar amount evolved. The site can prove damages.

So? If your boss fires you for being drunk on the job, you can prove financial damages too.

That doesn’t make them liable for those damages.

Google doesn't have the right to dictate content to The Federalist. So your example is moot. Showing up to work drunk is one thing. Publishing free expression is something else.

Google isn’t dictating content. They have the right to chose not to work with some people.

They also have the right to be sued accordingly

On what grounds?

Harassment.

Absolutely insane. If Google doesn’t want to anything to do with The Federalist, that’s literally the opposite of harassment.

try to put up a website without google support. let me know how that works for you. we've gotten to the point where the internet is like electricity and a staple of life and it no longer plays in the same playground as baking a cake.

you saying google can dictate who they support and don't won't hold water. you're literally saying they can dictate who can sell what on the internet.

google didn't invent the internet. no al gore didn't either. but if you think they have the right to do what they want and a GOV can't stop it - tell that to china.

i'll be over here.

 

[Marion Morrison]

No one is attacking their free speech.

NBC seems to be.

NBC does not have the ability to attack free speech.

No....they just get their buds in Google to do it.

Google isn’t stopping any speech.

They're using alorythms to prevent searches....thus stifling free expression. Been doing this for years.

That doesn’t stifle expression. We have right to free speech. We don’t have a right to an audience.

Huh, that's what we said about commie Kaepernick but people think his RIGHTS were infringed. Even though he was never put into any gulag I am aware of.

Ahhhh, but a negro multi millionaire cultural marxist should be able to express his commie views. You know, just as anyone is allowed to the N WORRRRD at work, right?

On top of being ignorant about everything, you are hypocritical about everything, but hollywood agrees with you. So, that is all that matters.

Idiots.

No one is attacking their free speech.

NBC seems to be.

NBC does not have the ability to attack free speech.

No....they just get their buds in Google to do it.

Google isn’t stopping any speech.

They're using alorythms to prevent searches....thus stifling free expression. Been doing this for years.

That doesn’t stifle expression. We have right to free speech. We don’t have a right to an audience.

Google lied to Congress and said that their search engine isn't conducting censorship....which helps the left mislead people that use their service.
Is this America or is it Cuba?
Apparently they want another Cuba.
To think they claimed Russia was influencing the election, but Google, Twitter, and Fakebook put Russia to shame.

what are you going to do? Arrest them for not being supportive enough of Teump?

Because that’s exactly the third world corruption I’d expect from this administration.

They received immunity from lawsuits as long as they agreed not to edit material or practice censorship. That would reclassify them as publishers like the New York Times. Since they have practiced censorship and edited their content according to their political ideology, they aren't a public domain anymore. They are publishers which opens them up to lawsuits.

The topic your brought up really doesn’t have much to do with the topic of the thread, which is about Google Adsense.

It has everything to do with it. Google is trying to attack web sites they don't agree with politically. They think they can get away with shutting down the revenue source of their political enemies. Sort of the way Obama used the IRS to harass conservative fundraising. It all amounts to a thugocracy run by leftists in social media. It's harassment and actionable in court.

Which has nothing to do with section 230. Section 230 says a website can not be held accountable for material posted on their website by other users. That’s not the issue here. The issue is whether Google has a right to refuse to let The Federalist participate in their advertiser program.

What grounds makes this actionable in court?

There is a dollar amount evolved. The site can prove damages.

So? If your boss fires you for being drunk on the job, you can prove financial damages too.

That doesn’t make them liable for those damages.

Google doesn't have the right to dictate content to The Federalist. So your example is moot. Showing up to work drunk is one thing. Publishing free expression is something else.

Google isn’t dictating content. They have the right to chose not to work with some people.

They also have the right to be sued accordingly

On what grounds?

Harassment.

Absolutely insane. If Google doesn’t want to anything to do with The Federalist, that’s literally the opposite of harassment.

But it's the epitome of bias.

Maybe. But that’s not Google’s problem.

Actually, it is a bit of a problem. I have a problem with it. I canceled all my Google accounts. **** 'em.

There are alternative search engines.

I remember when Altavista was better than Google.

Google peaked in "efficiency" in 2006-2007.

 

[bripat9643]

No one is attacking their free speech.

They sure as hell are, shit for brains.

 

[colfax_m]

No one is attacking their free speech.

NBC seems to be.

NBC does not have the ability to attack free speech.

No....they just get their buds in Google to do it.

Google isn’t stopping any speech.

They're using alorythms to prevent searches....thus stifling free expression. Been doing this for years.

That doesn’t stifle expression. We have right to free speech. We don’t have a right to an audience.

Huh, that's what we said about commie Kaepernick but people think his RIGHTS were infringed. Even though he was never put into any gulag I am aware of.

Ahhhh, but a negro multi millionaire cultural marxist should be able to express his commie views. You know, just as anyone is allowed to the N WORRRRD at work, right?

On top of being ignorant about everything, you are hypocritical about everything, but hollywood agrees with you. So, that is all that matters.

Idiots.

No one is attacking their free speech.

NBC seems to be.

NBC does not have the ability to attack free speech.

No....they just get their buds in Google to do it.

Google isn’t stopping any speech.

They're using alorythms to prevent searches....thus stifling free expression. Been doing this for years.

That doesn’t stifle expression. We have right to free speech. We don’t have a right to an audience.

Google lied to Congress and said that their search engine isn't conducting censorship....which helps the left mislead people that use their service.
Is this America or is it Cuba?
Apparently they want another Cuba.
To think they claimed Russia was influencing the election, but Google, Twitter, and Fakebook put Russia to shame.

what are you going to do? Arrest them for not being supportive enough of Teump?

Because that’s exactly the third world corruption I’d expect from this administration.

They received immunity from lawsuits as long as they agreed not to edit material or practice censorship. That would reclassify them as publishers like the New York Times. Since they have practiced censorship and edited their content according to their political ideology, they aren't a public domain anymore. They are publishers which opens them up to lawsuits.

The topic your brought up really doesn’t have much to do with the topic of the thread, which is about Google Adsense.

It has everything to do with it. Google is trying to attack web sites they don't agree with politically. They think they can get away with shutting down the revenue source of their political enemies. Sort of the way Obama used the IRS to harass conservative fundraising. It all amounts to a thugocracy run by leftists in social media. It's harassment and actionable in court.

Which has nothing to do with section 230. Section 230 says a website can not be held accountable for material posted on their website by other users. That’s not the issue here. The issue is whether Google has a right to refuse to let The Federalist participate in their advertiser program.

What grounds makes this actionable in court?

There is a dollar amount evolved. The site can prove damages.

So? If your boss fires you for being drunk on the job, you can prove financial damages too.

That doesn’t make them liable for those damages.

Google doesn't have the right to dictate content to The Federalist. So your example is moot. Showing up to work drunk is one thing. Publishing free expression is something else.

Google isn’t dictating content. They have the right to chose not to work with some people.

They also have the right to be sued accordingly

On what grounds?

Harassment.

Absolutely insane. If Google doesn’t want to anything to do with The Federalist, that’s literally the opposite of harassment.

But it's the epitome of bias.

Maybe. But that’s not Google’s problem.

Actually, it is a bit of a problem. I have a problem with it. I canceled all my Google accounts. **** 'em.

There are alternative search engines.

I remember when Altavista was better than Google.

Google peaked in "efficiency" in 2006-2007.

Go for it. I’m sure Google will sorely miss the revenue from all the free accounts you were using.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

Orwell was trying to warn us about the Psychocrats

Orwell was trying to warn us about Trump. The need for an enemy, someone to blame for your problems - like those who protest the government, so that Big Brother is not blamed for the problems. The crowds instantly turning on those who fall from Big Bother's favour, like how John Bolton is now an enemy of the people, and General Kelly, and Dr. Fauci. Trump tweets and the cult is here in a flash calling his latest target every name in the book.

Orwell was warning of a totalitarian police state where all criticism of Big Brother was brutally supressed. Those who dared criticize Big Brother were personally and professionally destroyed, and broken, and then returned to society to frighten others.

The USA is almost there.

Your delusions never cease to amaze me.

 

[mudwhistle]

No one is attacking their free speech.

NBC seems to be.

NBC does not have the ability to attack free speech.

No....they just get their buds in Google to do it.

Google isn’t stopping any speech.

They're using alorythms to prevent searches....thus stifling free expression. Been doing this for years.

That doesn’t stifle expression. We have right to free speech. We don’t have a right to an audience.

Huh, that's what we said about commie Kaepernick but people think his RIGHTS were infringed. Even though he was never put into any gulag I am aware of.

Ahhhh, but a negro multi millionaire cultural marxist should be able to express his commie views. You know, just as anyone is allowed to the N WORRRRD at work, right?

On top of being ignorant about everything, you are hypocritical about everything, but hollywood agrees with you. So, that is all that matters.

Idiots.

No one is attacking their free speech.

NBC seems to be.

NBC does not have the ability to attack free speech.

No....they just get their buds in Google to do it.

Google isn’t stopping any speech.

They're using alorythms to prevent searches....thus stifling free expression. Been doing this for years.

That doesn’t stifle expression. We have right to free speech. We don’t have a right to an audience.

Google lied to Congress and said that their search engine isn't conducting censorship....which helps the left mislead people that use their service.
Is this America or is it Cuba?
Apparently they want another Cuba.
To think they claimed Russia was influencing the election, but Google, Twitter, and Fakebook put Russia to shame.

what are you going to do? Arrest them for not being supportive enough of Teump?

Because that’s exactly the third world corruption I’d expect from this administration.

They received immunity from lawsuits as long as they agreed not to edit material or practice censorship. That would reclassify them as publishers like the New York Times. Since they have practiced censorship and edited their content according to their political ideology, they aren't a public domain anymore. They are publishers which opens them up to lawsuits.

The topic your brought up really doesn’t have much to do with the topic of the thread, which is about Google Adsense.

It has everything to do with it. Google is trying to attack web sites they don't agree with politically. They think they can get away with shutting down the revenue source of their political enemies. Sort of the way Obama used the IRS to harass conservative fundraising. It all amounts to a thugocracy run by leftists in social media. It's harassment and actionable in court.

Which has nothing to do with section 230. Section 230 says a website can not be held accountable for material posted on their website by other users. That’s not the issue here. The issue is whether Google has a right to refuse to let The Federalist participate in their advertiser program.

What grounds makes this actionable in court?

There is a dollar amount evolved. The site can prove damages.

So? If your boss fires you for being drunk on the job, you can prove financial damages too.

That doesn’t make them liable for those damages.

Google doesn't have the right to dictate content to The Federalist. So your example is moot. Showing up to work drunk is one thing. Publishing free expression is something else.

Google isn’t dictating content. They have the right to chose not to work with some people.

They also have the right to be sued accordingly

On what grounds?

Harassment.

Absolutely insane. If Google doesn’t want to anything to do with The Federalist, that’s literally the opposite of harassment.

How do you figure.
Clearly Google is harassing them at the behest of NBC.