Apple, Facebook and Spotify remove 'The Alex Jones Show,' Infowars over hate speech

[Younigue]

So does Antifa but their FB is still up. Zuck caved to pressure plain and simple.

Aww, you seem so sad. What's an UglyCasanova to do with himself with out his sexy time with Alex Jones? I'd like to say I'm concerned but I really don't care (do you?). I'm glad he's been "targeted"... You know who targeted him? Himself.

 

[Younigue]

David Duke is a person with an opinion. His opinion is that of his race being superior.

Alex Jones is a conspiracy moron.


The two are not the same. Not even remotely. Again, I'm saying be consistent in your rules that you cite - and if you think David Duke has anything to do with Alex Jones then I simply don't see the correlation.

Oh... It's hate.

 

[Jhhnn]

Alex Jones doesn't do shit. He has stupid fucking people that listen to him and THEY do stupid things like harass people.

Just like the Antifa folks on the left that attack and throw piss bottles at people they disagree with. That doesn't mean someone has ownership over other people's actions.

Uh-oh. Somebody said Antifa. Cue up the bothsiderism.

 

[Amused]

Social Media companies are not private property owners. That argument is long gone because social media and tech companies own and control just about all the information that moves around the interwebs.

Nope. And you're a hypocrite. Individual rights and capitalism until that freedom is no longer willing to do your bidding.

Here it is folks. The right-wing is not about capitalism and freedom. It is about control and authoritarianism.

Social media platforms are, by any measure, private companies. No matter how much you seek to control other's private property, you have no right. You do not get to impose your will on others.

Suck it up, Adolf.

 

[UglyCasanova]

Aww, you seem so sad. What's an UglyCasanova to do with himself with out his sexy time with Alex Jones? I'd like to say I'm concerned but I really don't care (do you?). I'm glad he's been "targeted"... You know who targeted him? Himself.

Im not a fan of Alex Jones sorry to disappoint

 

[UglyCasanova]

Oh lort

 

[IronWing]

Oh lort

Trump has been using twitter to conduct official business so blocking readers is simply a non-starter. That someone had to take it to court is ridiculous. Sadly, the taxpayers will likely foot the bill for Trump's antics.

 

[UglyCasanova]

I agree he shouldn’t be able to block users.

 

[zzyzxroad]

Oh lort

Interesting. Have you considered starting a new thread about this?

 

[Jhhnn]

David Duke is a person with an opinion. His opinion is that of his race being superior.

Alex Jones is a conspiracy moron.


The two are not the same. Not even remotely. Again, I'm saying be consistent in your rules that you cite - and if you think David Duke has anything to do with Alex Jones then I simply don't see the correlation.

David Duke has his own conspiracy theories.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__qp5_xmgmE

He just speaks in more civilized tones than Alex Jones. I wonder how he justifies Trump sucking up to Bibi...

 

[Younigue]

Im not a fan of Alex Jones sorry to disappoint

I don't care.

 

[UglyCasanova]

Interesting. Have you considered starting a new thread about this?

I’m sure one has been started already..?

 

[urvile]

Im not a fan of Alex Jones sorry to disappoint

Is it because he is a democrat? Fucking Hillary supporters.

This is OT but I have this recurring dream where I am walking home from the latest white is right book club meeting. I hear a rustle in a bush as I pass it. Suddenly two members of the KKK leap out.

One is a democrat the other a leftist. Then a third one steps out from behind a tree. An additional hole cut in his hood from which a large hooked nose protrudes. In the dream I am a white conservative so I know they are going to victimize me.

What should I do?

a) run up and down the street shouting the liberals are coming! The liberals are coming!
b) run away like a cuck.
c) let them victimize me because secretly I get off on it

 

[UglyCasanova]

David Duke has his own conspiracy theories.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__qp5_xmgmE

He just speaks in more civilized tones than Alex Jones. I wonder how he justifies Trump sucking up to Bibi...

Dukes tone isn’t his problem

 

[zzyzxroad]

I agree he shouldn’t be able to block users.

So your post was intended to divert the topic?

 

[UglyCasanova]

No it’s in response to one of the posts above it but you know this already.

 

[Amused]

No it’s in response to one of the posts above it but you know this already.

No, no its not. One has nothing to do with the other.

I know you desperately want to make it seem as though social media isn't private property, but this ruling has nothing to do with that. This ruling dictates how Trump, as a representative of the people is to treat his forms of public communication. It places no limitation on social media. Only Trump. Twitter is free to ban Trump at any time.

 

[Jhhnn]

So your post was intended to divert the topic?

No it’s in response to one of the posts above it but you know this already.

You did pounce on the diversion.

 

[baydude]

Oh lort

Does this mean that Twitter can’t ban Trump?

 

[Younigue]

Does this mean that Twitter can’t ban Trump?

My understanding is Twitter is saying they won't not can't.

 

[SNC]

Social Media companies are not private property owners. That argument is long gone because social media and tech companies own and control just about all the information that moves around the interwebs.

That you get all your info from Facebook and Twitter might be why you are confused on this matter.

 

[child of wonder]

I don't like companies colluding to make decisions for me on what opinions (even batshit crazy conspiracy theories no matter their political slant) I get to hear, however, they're private businesses and have every right to allow or ban people of their choosing from using their services. If anyone doesn't agree with their decision they're free not to use those company's services in response.

Pretty simple.

Although, I do get a big kick out of reading all these complete lunatics on Twitter screaming at the CEO for not banning Alex Jones there, too. Again, don't agree with Jack's decision? STOP USING TWITTER.

 

[brandonbull]

Nope. And you're a hypocrite. Individual rights and capitalism until that freedom is no longer willing to do your bidding.

Here it is folks. The right-wing is not about capitalism and freedom. It is about control and authoritarianism.

Social media platforms are, by any measure, private companies. No matter how much you seek to control other's private property, you have no right. You do not get to impose your will on others.

Suck it up, Adolf.

Sounds like someone is ok with monopolies dictating what people can and cannot see. I guess comrade Amused must control the flow of information in the name of privatization. I guess the government should subcontract all activities out to private companies so the Constitution doesn't apply because it would be a private companies controlling everything. If you think it's a good idea for companies to censor the flow of information because they have some ownership stake in the infrastructure, we a going down a slippery slope. I've pointed out before that Google and other similar companies own large distributions of fiber optic networks that they lease out excess capacity for the interwebs. What is to stop them from demand that only approved traffic can move over their networks? Research how much of the internet is dependent on AWS. Should Amazon demand to "see" all bits of data and inspect them for approved content? See where this is going?

 

[brycejones]

Sounds like someone is ok with monopolies dictating what people can and cannot see. I guess comrade Amused must control the flow of information in the name of privatization. I guess the government should subcontract all activities out to private companies so the Constitution doesn't apply because it would be a private companies controlling everything. If you think it's a good idea for companies to censor the flow of information because they have some ownership stake in the infrastructure, we a going down a slippery slope. I've pointed out before that Google and other similar companies own large distributions of fiber optic networks that they lease out excess capacity for the interwebs. What is to stop them from demand that only approved traffic can move over their networks? Research how much of the internet is dependent on AWS. Should Amazon demand to "see" all bits of data and inspect them for approved content? See where this is going?

I must have missed the law or regulation preventing you from starting your own social media site that also provides support for the political viewpoints you agree with. There should be quite the market out there. BTW this is also why you should support net neutrality because it would prevent the last mile carriers from discriminating against your business.

Get busy, you can do it.

 

[Vic]

Sounds like someone is ok with monopolies dictating what people can and cannot see. I guess comrade Amused must control the flow of information in the name of privatization. I guess the government should subcontract all activities out to private companies so the Constitution doesn't apply because it would be a private companies controlling everything. If you think it's a good idea for companies to censor the flow of information because they have some ownership stake in the infrastructure, we a going down a slippery slope. I've pointed out before that Google and other similar companies own large distributions of fiber optic networks that they lease out excess capacity for the interwebs. What is to stop them from demand that only approved traffic can move over their networks? Research how much of the internet is dependent on AWS. Should Amazon demand to "see" all bits of data and inspect them for approved content? See where this is going?

1. They are not monopolies. Jones is able to stream content from his own site. The only difference being that he now has to pay for the bandwidth instead of using others' for free.

2. What would have stopped them in your hypothetical question was Net Neutrality.

3. You sound exactly like a socialist.