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 08-24-2017, 02:42 PM
 
19,966 posts, read 7,803,775 times
Reputation: 6556

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Casper in Dallas View Post
If the medium is their company then yes they have the right to tell FOX to get out, you really do not get it do ya. Thing is they have not done so, they have been selective in who they refuse to sell to, if they were not then you might have an argument, a weak one but still a more valid argument than has been presented here.
So you support selective discrimination only based on the protected class of creed in the civil rights act and to selectively infringe free speech through the privatization of infrastructure?

Just so long as only conservatives are discriminated against and their free speech is infringed, it's all good!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-24-2017, 02:44 PM
 
2,274 posts, read 1,327,697 times
Reputation: 3984
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtl1 View Post
That is not analogous. Your analogy is similar to saying alt-right websites should have to provide a platform to progressives. These internet infrastructure companies' actions are more analogous to cable and satellite companies refusing to allow Fox news on at all because of their viewpoint. They are acting like they are the FCC and controlling access to the entire medium based on content.

The internet, largely developed and created by the US government and handed over to private entities, is not really a free market. A few companies and entities, through monopolies, economies of scale and barriers, and other schemes, basically control what is and isn't on the web. And I suspect the government is pulling strings and influencing these companies in the background.
What stops you from forming your own version of Pay Pal or Google to serve the alt-right market? That is really what this all comes down to, some conservatives believe that they should have an unfettered right to use someone's private property for their own purposes even if the owner objects.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2017, 02:54 PM
 
19,966 posts, read 7,803,775 times
Reputation: 6556
Quote:
Originally Posted by shorman View Post
What stops you from forming your own version of Pay Pal or Google to serve the alt-right market? That is really what this all comes down to, some conservatives believe that they should have an unfettered right to use someone's private property for their own purposes even if the owner objects.
What stops a gay couple getting married from starting their own cake bakery to serve their market? Or black people from starting their own diners when some of them didn't want to serve them etc etc?

I just told you even on the internet there are costs, barriers, fees, licensing and paperwork and waiting times controlled by private entities to becoming an infrastructure provider.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2017, 03:05 PM
 
Location: NE Ohio
30,421 posts, read 20,198,988 times
Reputation: 8958
Quote:
Originally Posted by floridanative10 View Post
Silicon valley has really turned ugly since the election.

"That’s what my lawsuit is about,†she said. “We filed a lawsuit against the U.S. government for Section 230 under the FEC code that gives Facebook and YouTube and Twitter this immunity against these lawsuits. That has to change.

PayPal did indeed suspend my account after a hit piece by ProPublica, a George Soros-funded uber-left quote-unquote ‘think tank,’ as it were,†said Geller, venturing that not much thinking seemed to be going on at the think tank in question.

“This is in the aftermath of Charlottesville. The left is using Charlottesville to move in for the kill and crush anyone who dissents,†she said. “ProPublica did this piece, and the reporter, Lauren Kirchner, had written to me and asked me a series of questions. Clearly, one could see from the questions that it was a set-up.â€

“She had asked me, ‘Have you been shut down by other tech companies for being a hate site?’ I mean, you have to love the assumption that I’m a hate site because I cover jihad terror-related news and sharia. That’s the focus of the website,†Geller said.

Pamela Geller: Too Much Power over Free Speech in the Hands of a Small Number of Big Tech Companies
Pay Pal also shut down Jihad Watch's (Robert Spencer) account based on the an article by the Southern Poverty Law Center, a George Soros funded site (Soros also funds Wikipedia, which often cites SPLC in their articles on groups like Geller's).

Jihad Watch has since been restored, Spencer told Fox News.

I agree with Pamela Geller, and Facebook et al. should not be allowed to violate the First Amendment just because they are "social media." There is a lot of news and commentary being posted, and everyone who posts who is involved in political debate should have the same rights as any so-called "journalist," most of whom do not engage in real journalism, but in "yellow journalism."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2017, 03:06 PM
 
Location: NE Ohio
30,421 posts, read 20,198,988 times
Reputation: 8958
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dbones View Post
This concerns me as well. They are all run by Statist Leftists.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2017, 03:07 PM
 
2,112 posts, read 1,132,005 times
Reputation: 1195
Quote:
Originally Posted by shorman View Post
What happened to the conservative love for the free market and the rights of private businesses? At any time a member of the alt-right is free to open their own tech company that will serve the hate speech market niche.

Also too, how is this an assault on the 1st Amendment when we are discussing the actions of a privately owned business like Google or Paypal?
They are only turning against corporate America because they cancelled the accounts of Nazi websites, otherwise they'd be fawning all over them.

I mean seriously, what's their solution, big government intervention?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2017, 03:08 PM
 
Location: NE Ohio
30,421 posts, read 20,198,988 times
Reputation: 8958
Quote:
Originally Posted by shorman View Post
What happened to the conservative love for the free market and the rights of private businesses? At any time a member of the alt-right is free to open their own tech company that will serve the hate speech market niche.

Also too, how is this an assault on the 1st Amendment when we are discussing the actions of a privately owned business like Google or Paypal?


Think!!! Don't any of you leftists know how to think?

Do we have a right to free speech in America, or don't we? Or is that right dependent upon whether someone who is hosting a forum agrees with our point of view? That seems to be the case more and more often.

I don't remember reading in the Constitution that free speech only applied if you owned the printing press. Speech can be written or oral. If written, and one has access to an open forum such as a medium like Facebook, I don't think Facebook should be allowed to take your post down simply on the basis that they don't like the message. Vulgarity, etc. is another matter.

I have a friend on Facebook who often writes about Islam. She has been put in "Facebook jail" numerous times simply because Facebook doesn't like her opinion of Islam.

Last edited by nononsenseguy; 08-24-2017 at 03:20 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2017, 03:11 PM
 
20,393 posts, read 12,290,247 times
Reputation: 10168
Quote:
Originally Posted by shorman View Post
What happened to the conservative love for the free market and the rights of private businesses? At any time a member of the alt-right is free to open their own tech company that will serve the hate speech market niche.

Also too, how is this an assault on the 1st Amendment when we are discussing the actions of a privately owned business like Google or Paypal?
we don't have to get past "What happened to the conservative love for the free market"


to understand that you don't know what a free market is, don't care what a free market is, and do not intend to ever be a person who believes freedom is important.




thanks for playing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2017, 03:11 PM
 
2,274 posts, read 1,327,697 times
Reputation: 3984
Quote:
Originally Posted by nononsenseguy View Post
Pay Pal also shut down Jihad Watch's (Robert Spencer) account based on the an article by the Southern Poverty Law Center, a George Soros funded site (Soros also funds Wikipedia, which often cites SPLC in their articles on groups like Geller's).

Jihad Watch has since been restored, Spencer told Fox News.

I agree with Pamela Geller, and Facebook et al. should not be allowed to violate the First Amendment just because they are "social media." There is a lot of news and commentary being posted, and everyone who posts who is involved in political debate should have the same rights as any so-called "journalist," most of whom do not engage in real journalism, but in "yellow journalism."
What journalistic rights are you talking about? Are you saying that someone like Keith Olbermann can demand the use of Fox News' studio and airtime to share his political viewpoint anytime he chooses?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2017, 03:20 PM
 
19,966 posts, read 7,803,775 times
Reputation: 6556
Quote:
Originally Posted by nononsenseguy View Post


Think!!! Don't any of you leftists know how to think?

Do we have a right to free speech in America, or don't we? Or is that right dependent upon whether someone who is hosting a forum agrees with our point of view? That seems to be the case more and more often.

I don't remember reading in the Constitution that free speech only applied if you owned the printing press. Speech can be written or oral. If written, and one has access to an open forum such as a medium like Facebook, I don't think Facebook should be allowed to take your post down simply on the basis that they don't like the message. Vulgarity, etc. is another matter. But simply stating ones opinion, even if you don't like it, is a violation of the First Amendment.

I have a friend on Facebook who often writes about Islam. She has been put in "Facebook jail" numerous times simply because Facebook doesn't like her opinion of Islam.
She needs to get on Gab or something similar. I understand Facebook is a bigger platform to get your message out, but Facebook isn't letting any messages they don't approve out, and we need to drain it of users.
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.

© 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