"Why Stop There?", CNN Advocates Mass Censorship

Norman

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
31,256
Reaction score
15,062
Points
1,590
Darcy wrote:
“Nearly every tweet from the president at this point is labeled for misinfo. Which had me thinking. Why doesn’t Twitter just take the step of labeling his entire account as a known source of election disinfo? And why stop there? Why not label accounts that repeatedly spread claims the platform has to fact-check?”
There was a time from the very touchstone of American journalism was the rejection of such calls for censorship, including at CNN.

What is chilling about Darcy’s writings is that they reflect the view of many now in Congress and in the Democratic Party. Indeed, they reflect many in the Biden campaign. Once a party that fought for free speech, it has become the party demanding Internet censorship and hate speech laws. President-Elect Joe Biden has called for speech controls and recently appointed a transition head for agency media issues that is one of the most pronounced anti-free speech figures in the United States. It is a trend that seems now to be find support in the media, which celebrated the speech of French President Emmanuel Macron before Congress where he called on the United States to follow the model of Europe on hate speech.



They propagandists have already surpassed Soviet Union, even there the media did not flag every comment made by their "elected" leader. Since when has the media determined fact from fiction anyway? They are not able to tell their ass from the ground.

The communists are removing their masks at a higher and higher pace.
 

anynameyouwish

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2018
Messages
5,921
Reaction score
1,462
Points
170
Darcy wrote:
“Nearly every tweet from the president at this point is labeled for misinfo. Which had me thinking. Why doesn’t Twitter just take the step of labeling his entire account as a known source of election disinfo? And why stop there? Why not label accounts that repeatedly spread claims the platform has to fact-check?”
There was a time from the very touchstone of American journalism was the rejection of such calls for censorship, including at CNN.

What is chilling about Darcy’s writings is that they reflect the view of many now in Congress and in the Democratic Party. Indeed, they reflect many in the Biden campaign. Once a party that fought for free speech, it has become the party demanding Internet censorship and hate speech laws. President-Elect Joe Biden has called for speech controls and recently appointed a transition head for agency media issues that is one of the most pronounced anti-free speech figures in the United States. It is a trend that seems now to be find support in the media, which celebrated the speech of French President Emmanuel Macron before Congress where he called on the United States to follow the model of Europe on hate speech.



They propagandists have already surpassed Soviet Union, even there the media did not flag every comment made by their "elected" leader. Since when has the media determined fact from fiction anyway? They are not able to tell their ass from the ground.

The communists are removing their masks at a higher and higher pace.
1. it isnt censorship. he can say it. you can say it. AON can say it. limbaugh can repeat it. FOX news can repeat it 24/7, maria bartiromo can regurgitate it.

but twitter has every right to set its own standards.

2. censorship would be like if you killed every democrat. they would be censored.
so when you and trump agree that the “only good democrat is a dead one” YOU are advocating murder....and censorship.
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
71,933
Reaction score
15,037
Points
2,220
The communists are removing their masks at a higher and higher pace.
Agreed. When they go for hate speech laws that will be the end. We will be arrested for saying things that are true, and just unpopular with the State.

Millions will be a risk and living in fear, due to old posts being used in court cases.
 

JackOfNoTrades

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2019
Messages
9,064
Reaction score
7,678
Points
1,940
Location
Granite State
What's wrong with what Darcy says? Again, the 1st Amendment is not a license to say anything you want with no possibility of repercussions. That's not the way it works. Social media is a sewer.
Are we going to license libel and slander as norms? Because that's a lot of what comes out of Trump's tweets. Twitter is a private company. They have every right to set their own TOS.
If Trump doesn't like it, he's free to go elsewhere.
 
OP
Norman

Norman

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
31,256
Reaction score
15,062
Points
1,590
What's wrong with what Darcy says? Again, the 1st Amendment is not a license to say anything you want with no possibility of repercussions. That's not the way it works. Social media is a sewer.
Are we going to license libel and slander as norms? Because that's a lot of what comes out of Trump's tweets. Twitter is a private company. They have every right to set their own TOS.
If Trump doesn't like it, he's free to go elsewhere.
If you are a communist, nothing is wrong with it.

If you are a clear thinking American, everything is wrong with it.
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
71,933
Reaction score
15,037
Points
2,220
Darcy wrote:
“Nearly every tweet from the president at this point is labeled for misinfo. Which had me thinking. Why doesn’t Twitter just take the step of labeling his entire account as a known source of election disinfo? And why stop there? Why not label accounts that repeatedly spread claims the platform has to fact-check?”
There was a time from the very touchstone of American journalism was the rejection of such calls for censorship, including at CNN.

What is chilling about Darcy’s writings is that they reflect the view of many now in Congress and in the Democratic Party. Indeed, they reflect many in the Biden campaign. Once a party that fought for free speech, it has become the party demanding Internet censorship and hate speech laws. President-Elect Joe Biden has called for speech controls and recently appointed a transition head for agency media issues that is one of the most pronounced anti-free speech figures in the United States. It is a trend that seems now to be find support in the media, which celebrated the speech of French President Emmanuel Macron before Congress where he called on the United States to follow the model of Europe on hate speech.



They propagandists have already surpassed Soviet Union, even there the media did not flag every comment made by their "elected" leader. Since when has the media determined fact from fiction anyway? They are not able to tell their ass from the ground.

The communists are removing their masks at a higher and higher pace.
1. it isnt censorship. he can say it. you can say it. AON can say it. limbaugh can repeat it. FOX news can repeat it 24/7, maria bartiromo can regurgitate it.

but twitter has every right to set its own standards.

2. censorship would be like if you killed every democrat. they would be censored.
so when you and trump agree that the “only good democrat is a dead one” YOU are advocating murder....and censorship.

Twitter is supposed to be NOT be exerting editorial control. That is part of the deal. When they take sides they are violating that. Of course Biden will give them a pass.


Laws. Who cares, right?
 
OP
Norman

Norman

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
31,256
Reaction score
15,062
Points
1,590
The communists are removing their masks at a higher and higher pace.
Agreed. When they go for hate speech laws that will be the end. We will be arrested for saying things that are true, and just unpopular with the State.

Millions will be a risk and living in fear, due to old posts being used in court cases.
This is clearly the future what that they are aiming for. It is already a reality in many parts of Europe.

That said, even there they don't censor an elected president and say "it is not enough yet" publicly.
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
71,933
Reaction score
15,037
Points
2,220
What's wrong with what Darcy says? Again, the 1st Amendment is not a license to say anything you want with no possibility of repercussions. That's not the way it works. Social media is a sewer.
Are we going to license libel and slander as norms? Because that's a lot of what comes out of Trump's tweets. Twitter is a private company. They have every right to set their own TOS.
If Trump doesn't like it, he's free to go elsewhere.

Right. Use your power to silence your enemies. And use your mobs to terrorize them. And use your elected officials to provide legal protection for your thugs. ANd if anyone defends themselves, arrest them for it.


Yeah, great society you are building.


ON the other hand, you can't seem to stop people from shitting in the streets or robbing stores blind to the point of going out of business.


But your grip on power, no one doubts that will be firm.
 

HenryBHough

Platinum Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
30,280
Reaction score
6,386
Points
1,140
Location
Oak Grove, Massachusetts
1. it isnt censorship. he can say it. you can say it. AON can say it. limbaugh can repeat it. FOX news can repeat it 24/7, maria bartiromo can regurgitate it.

but twitter has every right to set its own standards.

2. censorship would be like if you killed every democrat. they would be censored.
so when you and trump agree that the “only good democrat is a dead one” YOU are advocating murder....and censorship.

Must disagree on that final point.

It is not "murder" to holding the opinion that "only good democrat is a dead one". To deny anyone to hold and/or express that opinion is a raw example of censorship.

If one is of a religious bent (Christian/Muslim/Jew/Wiccan) were to pray vor a democrat-only plague and one happened along - that, too, is not murder.

Now commissioning some Chink Bio-lab to create such a plague....is that murder? The contract to create is completely innocent unless it includes a clause to distribute.

Now if it happened (as it couldn't possibly..........).....to accidentally escape that still doesn't precisely fit the definition of murder.

Or maybe we oughta have a congressional probe into..........
 

andaronjim

Platinum Member
Joined
May 6, 2015
Messages
25,198
Reaction score
10,725
Points
950
Location
Floor E Da
Darcy wrote:
“Nearly every tweet from the president at this point is labeled for misinfo. Which had me thinking. Why doesn’t Twitter just take the step of labeling his entire account as a known source of election disinfo? And why stop there? Why not label accounts that repeatedly spread claims the platform has to fact-check?”
There was a time from the very touchstone of American journalism was the rejection of such calls for censorship, including at CNN.

What is chilling about Darcy’s writings is that they reflect the view of many now in Congress and in the Democratic Party. Indeed, they reflect many in the Biden campaign. Once a party that fought for free speech, it has become the party demanding Internet censorship and hate speech laws. President-Elect Joe Biden has called for speech controls and recently appointed a transition head for agency media issues that is one of the most pronounced anti-free speech figures in the United States. It is a trend that seems now to be find support in the media, which celebrated the speech of French President Emmanuel Macron before Congress where he called on the United States to follow the model of Europe on hate speech.



They propagandists have already surpassed Soviet Union, even there the media did not flag every comment made by their "elected" leader. Since when has the media determined fact from fiction anyway? They are not able to tell their ass from the ground.

The communists are removing their masks at a higher and higher pace.
I dont think the Prog party was ever for free speech, they always talked the talk, but never walked the walk.
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
71,933
Reaction score
15,037
Points
2,220

JackOfNoTrades

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2019
Messages
9,064
Reaction score
7,678
Points
1,940
Location
Granite State
What's wrong with what Darcy says? Again, the 1st Amendment is not a license to say anything you want with no possibility of repercussions. That's not the way it works. Social media is a sewer.
Are we going to license libel and slander as norms? Because that's a lot of what comes out of Trump's tweets. Twitter is a private company. They have every right to set their own TOS.
If Trump doesn't like it, he's free to go elsewhere.

Right. Use your power to silence your enemies. And use your mobs to terrorize them. And use your elected officials to provide legal protection for your thugs. ANd if anyone defends themselves, arrest them for it.


Yeah, great society you are building.


ON the other hand, you can't seem to stop people from shitting in the streets or robbing stores blind to the point of going out of business.


But your grip on power, no one doubts that will be firm.
They are a private company. Free to set their own rules and code of conduct. Again, if you disagree, go elsewhere.
But I suspect you are just pissed that lies, misinformation, and propaganda won't be tolerated the way it has for the last 12 years or so.
 

OldLady

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
65,655
Reaction score
16,441
Points
2,220
What's wrong with what Darcy says? Again, the 1st Amendment is not a license to say anything you want with no possibility of repercussions. That's not the way it works. Social media is a sewer.
Are we going to license libel and slander as norms? Because that's a lot of what comes out of Trump's tweets. Twitter is a private company. They have every right to set their own TOS.
If Trump doesn't like it, he's free to go elsewhere.
If you are a communist, nothing is wrong with it.

If you are a clear thinking American, everything is wrong with it.
Freedom of speech is not freedom to lie, spread lies or spread ideas that ultimately interfere with an other group's right to equality. You might not be able to tell the truth from a lie anymore, or figure out what is hate speech, but fortunately there are still fair minded people with both feet on the ground who can.

You folks are perpetually complaining about censorship, but I have never once had any trouble finding videos, articles and blogs on ...for instance, Hunter Biden's laptop or election fraud. You have no problem running your mouth here, or on the other forum I visit, merrily spreading conjecture and confused innuendo as truth. Talk radio is strong. Tucker & Lou & Hannity are strong. The gossip rags are strong. Breitbart is strong. You've got a new hidey hole called Parler for when you've lied too much on twitter.

It seems what you really want is a license to lie, and to destroy any ideas other than your own. Tough shit. Quit spreading outrageous propaganda that has already been debunked and maybe you will be heard.
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
71,933
Reaction score
15,037
Points
2,220
What's wrong with what Darcy says? Again, the 1st Amendment is not a license to say anything you want with no possibility of repercussions. That's not the way it works. Social media is a sewer.
Are we going to license libel and slander as norms? Because that's a lot of what comes out of Trump's tweets. Twitter is a private company. They have every right to set their own TOS.
If Trump doesn't like it, he's free to go elsewhere.

Right. Use your power to silence your enemies. And use your mobs to terrorize them. And use your elected officials to provide legal protection for your thugs. ANd if anyone defends themselves, arrest them for it.


Yeah, great society you are building.


ON the other hand, you can't seem to stop people from shitting in the streets or robbing stores blind to the point of going out of business.


But your grip on power, no one doubts that will be firm.
They are a private company. Free to set their own rules and code of conduct. Again, if you disagree, go elsewhere.
But I suspect you are just pissed that lies, misinformation, and propaganda won't be tolerated the way it has for the last 12 years or so.

And if they apply the code in a partisan manner, they are violating the rules that protect them for being held liable for the speech the "give a platform to".


AND even if they were still within the letter of the law, they are still suppressing speech, that is not what you do to get the Truth out, but was you do when you know that the Truth is your enemy.
 

B. Kidd

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2010
Messages
26,490
Reaction score
9,183
Points
900
Location
Western Lands
Wait until the Dimm's advocate for Social Credit Scoring like China has. CNN and most of the Pravda media will be right there cheering it on!
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top