Zuckerberg personally decides Alex Jones/Info wars fate
Comments
-
Even creepier, these big tech companies all acted in unison, apparently together, to ban Alex Jones at the same time. Nothing to see here, move along...
-
Valid concerns. But be forthright with the outcome of what you're suggesting: some level of impingement to even confiscation of rights and property of private American companies by the government for "the common good." That makes me uncomfortable.oregonblitzkrieg said:
Your libertarianism is running into a dead end here. Let everyone do whatever they want and just say fuck it doesn't work in every situation. Google, Facebook, Twitter, Apple and a few other big tech companies when taken together, basically control the public square now and the flow of information ideas. Too much power concentrated in too few hands. We already have the evidence and know how companies like Facebook and Google cooperate with foreign governments to crack down on their own citizens. You're a clown if you think they should have that kind of power, and that they're not already doing it here in the USA.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Sounds a lot like nationalization to me.oregonblitzkrieg said:Social media platforms and the internet in general have become the public space/forum where people gather to interact, share ideas, talk about politics and other stuff. They have too much power to decide what gets heard and what doesn't. Things can't stay like they are now, it's not working.
Either apply the rules of the first amendment to big tech companies by creating an Internet Bill of Rights or something like that to protect free speech and punish online censorship, or break them up. -
Just like when all of Tiger’s sponsors dropped him around the same time. #Conspiracyoregonblitzkrieg said:Even creepier, these big tech companies all acted in unison, apparently together, to ban Alex Jones at the same time. Nothing to see here, move along...
-
OBK, right now your boy Trump is in there. 20 years from now, maybe it's Chelsea Clinton. Do you trust her hands on the levers of a centralized and highly regulated internet? If you give the government the power and legal tools to "free" information, they can use the same to restrict it, and probably call it "freeing" to boot.
-
maybe if she were hotterGrundleStiltzkin said:OBK, right now your boy Trump is in there. 20 years from now, maybe it's Chelsea Clinton. Do you trust her hands on the levers of a centralized and highly regulated internet? If you give the government the power and legal tools to "free" information, they can use the same to restrict it, and probably call it "freeing" to boot.
-
YouTube matters.Pitchfork51 said:
It's definitely a new frontier.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Sounds a lot like nationalization to me.oregonblitzkrieg said:Social media platforms and the internet in general have become the public space/forum where people gather to interact, share ideas, talk about politics and other stuff. They have too much power to decide what gets heard and what doesn't. Things can't stay like they are now, it's not working.
Either apply the rules of the first amendment to big tech companies by creating an Internet Bill of Rights or something like that to protect free speech and punish online censorship, or break them up.
Pretty much all information and interaction is done through like 3 big companies.
It's just too easy for them to push an agenda. I don't really know the solution to make things better.
Then again I don't use facebook so who gives a fuck. -
It's a sticky wicket. I support net neutrality but hate the government getting too involved with the internet. I also hate how big tech companies are wielding their power to control and censor information and the flow of information/ideas/perspectives that don't fit into their agenda. Big tech companies have become a threat to free speech and need to be dealt with in some form or another.GrundleStiltzkin said:OBK, right now your boy Trump is in there. 20 years from now, maybe it's Chelsea Clinton. Do you trust her hands on the levers of a centralized and highly regulated internet? If you give the government the power and legal tools to "free" information, they can use the same to restrict it, and probably call it "freeing" to boot.
-
Not the same. Tiger had a squeaky clean image and got punished when he made mistakes. Alex Jones has always been a lunatic. It's not like he suddenly changed course and went off the rails.ThomasFremont said:
Just like when all of Tiger’s sponsors dropped him around the same time. #Conspiracyoregonblitzkrieg said:Even creepier, these big tech companies all acted in unison, apparently together, to ban Alex Jones at the same time. Nothing to see here, move along...
-
Plus he's got 0 nattiesoregonblitzkrieg said:
Not the same. Tiger had a squeaky clean image and got punished when he made mistakes. Alex Jones has always been a lunatic. It's not like he suddenly changed course and went off the rails.ThomasFremont said:
Just like when all of Tiger’s sponsors dropped him around the same time. #Conspiracyoregonblitzkrieg said:Even creepier, these big tech companies all acted in unison, apparently together, to ban Alex Jones at the same time. Nothing to see here, move along...
-
Off season natty is the best natty.Pitchfork51 said:
Plus he's got 0 nattiesoregonblitzkrieg said:
Not the same. Tiger had a squeaky clean image and got punished when he made mistakes. Alex Jones has always been a lunatic. It's not like he suddenly changed course and went off the rails.ThomasFremont said:
Just like when all of Tiger’s sponsors dropped him around the same time. #Conspiracyoregonblitzkrieg said:Even creepier, these big tech companies all acted in unison, apparently together, to ban Alex Jones at the same time. Nothing to see here, move along...
Every quook says so.
