The right still can’t get over Trump being banned on social media

[Into the Night]

You still aren't getting it, regardless of the content, and labeling Trump's tweets as "innocuous" is questionable, they are private entities, and they can edit or censor what they want, as the right likes to say, and by the way was the right's argument in the Fairness Doctrine debate, the market decides, not the Government

And the "public square for political speech" is a stretch, it has no obligation in any form to be the "public square for political speech"

No. If they have a terms of service, they MUST apply that terms of service equally among all users. Anything else is a violation of contract law. They do NOT have the authority to slander users, either, like they've been doing.

[Into the Night]

It's pretty fuckin simple to avoid 'censorship'. Just follow the rules of the platform you are using. trump couldn't control himself, so he got spanked.

It's been beautiful, actually.

Sorry dude. These companies have and continue to violate their own terms of service agreements. Also, they are not being applied equally. Both are in violation of existing law.

[Into the Night]

Sort of off topic, but do you agree with Warren and others who have been pushing for the break up of big tech companies?

They are becoming less and less relevant with each day. They broke themselves.

[Into the Night]

Her position, as I somewhat understand it, is that these companies are essentially monopolies with too much power which restricts innovation. Thus they need to be broken up. Not sure is that’s similar to the Fairness Doctrine or not

No, it's not. It's anti-monopoly law. I believe their conspiring to force Parler off the air also comes under anti-racketeering law.

[Into the Night]

if the "it's a private company" meme is all you have in response -then i'm wasting my time here

But what the fuck are you bringing up Fairness ? that was government regulation.
and it's BROADCAST as I've told you time after time which is not comparable at all here to interactive media
yes this is the public square. we dont pamphleteer or stand on soapboxes anymore
This is how we do political speech

There is already in existence law known as the telecommunications services law. Perhaps it's time to expand this law to include web services with open user signup, such as Twitter, Facebook, or Youtube. This wouldn't nullify Section 230 either. They would still be protected from their user's content. That essentially places upon them the same restrictions as the telephone companies.

[Into the Night]

except Pahler is still questionable - and Big Tech still has outsized power to ban and censor in a capricious fashion

No, they don't. Parler has it's bindery up and running. The website currently has a fixed message on it, while the rest of the software and content is restored and stabilized. Won't be long now.
Meanwhile, Amazon Web Services has very clearly demonstrated it's not worth putting the money and effort to build a permanent website there. Other websites running there are already moving off of it. I don't blame them.

You can't stop the signal, Mel.

[CFM]

cracks anyone up, they could give a rat’s ass about censorship, supposed free speech, like abstract concepts could be acknowledged in a talk radio rant. In reality, their just upset cause Trump doesn’t have his podium to disseminate his bumper sticker cliches or reposts off of conspiracy websites. They don’t know how to react without a 280 character tweet from the Messiah

Under any other circumstances, they’d be screaming that the Gov’t can’t interfere in the internal decisions of a private company

You support him being banned because you know what he's done is good and you can't handle having to acknowledge he did while admitting the black POS before him was worthless as you, boy.

Go get your cake baked, fag boy.

[Walt]

cracks anyone up, they could give a rat’s ass about censorship, supposed free speech, like abstract concepts could be acknowledged in a talk radio rant. In reality, their just upset cause Trump doesn’t have his podium to disseminate his bumper sticker cliches or reposts off of conspiracy websites. They don’t know how to react without a 280 character tweet from the Messiah

Under any other circumstances, they’d be screaming that the Gov’t can’t interfere in the internal decisions of a private company

In places like China, the government can force social media companies to distribute the government line, and can force publishers to publish government books.

[Walt]

I support Trump and I've never read any of his tweets.

Why would you support someone without knowing what he is saying?

[CFM]

Why would you support someone without knowing what he is saying?

So the only way someone can know what a person believes is by reading tweets?

You supported Obama and the only thing you needed to know was his skin color.

[Phantasmal]

Why would you support someone without knowing what he is saying?

Stupidity

[Son of the Revolution]

Stupidity

139743419_10218465706856589_4347048518684306442_o.jpg

[martin]

should they?.....

Yeah, they should. Agreed that restricting speech on an open platform is not good. But worse is the spread of misinformation that undercuts social institutions, the essence of Donald Trump's divisive tweets.

[Walt]

So the only way someone can know what a person believes is by reading tweets?

How can we ever know what people truly believe? We support what people say, what they do, and what we believe that means they believe. trump main communication method was twitter. Saying you support what he is tweeting, without ever reading tweeting just seems odd to me.

I can understand if there is a lot to read, delegating it to others. I can understand supporting a thousand page budget without reading it through. You listen to a trusted source about what the bill does, because you do not have the time to read it fully. But these are tweets, 280 characters. If you cannot even find the time to read 280 characters...

I don't know, it seems strange to me.

[CFM]

How can we ever know what people truly believe? We support what people say, what they do, and what we believe that means they believe. trump main communication method was twitter. Saying you support what he is tweeting, without ever reading tweeting just seems odd to me.

I can understand if there is a lot to read, delegating it to others. I can understand supporting a thousand page budget without reading it through. You listen to a trusted source about what the bill does, because you do not have the time to read it fully. But these are tweets, 280 characters. If you cannot even find the time to read 280 characters...

I don't know, it seems strange to me.

By listening to them. Twitter wasn't the only communication method he used, dumbass.

Where did I say I based my support on tweets, boy?