Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-07-2018, 11:07 AM
 
Location: The Republic of Gilead
12,716 posts, read 7,804,676 times
Reputation: 11338

Advertisements

YouTube is a private company and they have the right to decide what kind of content is allowed on their platform. For what it's worth, they also censor pornographic content (you can still find some but it will be removed if discovered). Conservatives likely applaud that. We heard this same thing when A&E cancelled Duck Dynasty because of the Robertsons' extreme homophobia. A private company deciding what kind of content they will endorse is NOT the same as the government attempting to censor content. Phil Robertson has the Constitutional right to say that God hates f*gs but he doesn't have the right to be employed by A&E. If somebody with deep pockets wanted to start a "ConservaTube" or something and only show content that conforms to a conservative worldview, they would have the total right to do so. On the other hand, conservatives continually attack the media and 43% of them actually think Trump should have the authority to shut down the media. And yet Democrats are supposed to be the ones against the Constitution?

Why is it that conservatives can't see the difference between private companies censoring their platforms and the government censoring speech and why is it that conservatives actually tend to favor the government shutting down free speech when it benefits them?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-07-2018, 11:11 AM
 
Location: Tip of the Sphere. Just the tip.
4,540 posts, read 2,765,810 times
Reputation: 5277
Conservatives don't *want* to understand this distinction.

When a private company wants to discriminate against [insert non-favored demographic], conservatives are the first to claim that private companies should be able to do whatever they want.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2018, 11:12 AM
 
13,944 posts, read 5,615,884 times
Reputation: 8602
Same reason liberals can't see it in cases where private business employs their own freedom of association to the detriment of some liberal cause du jour - it runs counter to their particular ideological mantra.

Same reason Obama doing a Thing A was gold to liberals and anathema to conservatives, while Trump doing the exact same Thing A is gold t conservatives and anathema to liberals.

Both liberals and conservatives define whether a thing is moral/immoral, ethical/unethical, good/bad based on the ideological/party membership bona fides of the person doing that thing. You know that "logical inconsistency" thing us libertarian folks talk about...well, this is an example.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2018, 11:13 AM
 
28,122 posts, read 12,578,158 times
Reputation: 15334
Its 2018...why should we have a federal govt agency monitoring media content for things like language, nudity, etc? Is it really the govts place to determine what is appropriate and what is not? not to mention, it would be interesting to find out what they are basing their determinations off of as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2018, 11:13 AM
 
Location: Phoenix, AZ
15,154 posts, read 11,618,376 times
Reputation: 8625
Quote:
Originally Posted by bawac34618 View Post
YouTube is a private company and they have the right to decide what kind of content is allowed on their platform. For what it's worth, they also censor pornographic content (you can still find some but it will be removed if discovered). Conservatives likely applaud that. We heard this same thing when A&E cancelled Duck Dynasty because of the Robertsons' extreme homophobia. A private company deciding what kind of content they will endorse is NOT the same as the government attempting to censor content. If somebody with deep pockets wanted to start a "ConservaTube" or something and only show content that conforms to a conservative worldview, they would have the total right to do so. On the other hand, conservatives continually attack the media and 43% of them actually think Trump should have the authority to shut down the media. And yet Democrats are supposed to be the ones against the Constitution?

Why is it that conservatives can't see the difference between private companies censoring their platforms and the government censoring speech and why is it that conservatives actually tend to favor the government shutting down free speech when it benefits them?
Funny you mention that "only " conservatives don know the difference...This from a bunch of crybaby snowflakes who were constantly whining that the NFL was violating the players 1st amendment rights when they told them not to kneel...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2018, 11:18 AM
 
Location: The Republic of Gilead
12,716 posts, read 7,804,676 times
Reputation: 11338
Quote:
Originally Posted by ELOrocks17 View Post
Funny you mention that "only " conservatives don know the difference...This from a bunch of crybaby snowflakes who were constantly whining that the NFL was violating the players 1st amendment rights when they told them not to kneel...
The NFL made that decision because of pressure from conservatives. They couldn't accept that football players had the right to kneel and coerced the NFL into forcing players not to. The NFL is a private company so fair enough.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2018, 11:19 AM
 
19,573 posts, read 8,513,185 times
Reputation: 10096
It is perfectly fine for private companies to censor content based on blatantly partisan criterian. However, under FTC regulations, they have to publish their terms of use and then conform to those standards consistently.

So, all Twitter, Youtube, Google and Facebook have to do is openly publish their intent to cater to leftist perpectives, and to oppose rightest perspectives, or whatever. But so far, they have not done that and continue to present themselves as unbiased, non-partisan and even-handed. LOL.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2018, 11:22 AM
 
Location: The Republic of Gilead
12,716 posts, read 7,804,676 times
Reputation: 11338
Quote:
Originally Posted by rstevens62 View Post
Its 2018...why should we have a federal govt agency monitoring media content for things like language, nudity, etc? Is it really the govts place to determine what is appropriate and what is not? not to mention, it would be interesting to find out what they are basing their determinations off of as well.
That's a good question. Conservatives want religious institutions to decide whether or not movies and other forms of entertainment are appropriate. Yet, somehow they claim they are for small government.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0qdBIMpSGE
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2018, 11:23 AM
 
Location: Oklahoma
17,774 posts, read 13,665,953 times
Reputation: 17806
Quote:
Originally Posted by ELOrocks17 View Post
This from a bunch of crybaby snowflakes

Tell 'em how it is ELO

Bo Donaldson and the Haywoods ROCK!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2018, 11:23 AM
 
Location: Phoenix, AZ
15,154 posts, read 11,618,376 times
Reputation: 8625
Quote:
Originally Posted by bawac34618 View Post
The NFL made that decision because of pressure from conservatives. They couldn't accept that football players had the right to kneel and coerced the NFL into forcing players not to. The NFL is a private company so fair enough.
Um..they dont have the "right" to kneel, any more than i have the right to come into work late every day
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:08 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top