ArmedCorgi
.475 A&M Magnum
Wow, I'm out. Fuck this thread.
Tucker Carlson and Trump Stun America—Powerful People Are Scared!
- Thread starter Acer-m14
- Start date
BDinPutnam
.475 A&M Magnum
Mostly I thought we were talking about platforms here, not service providers.
I am undecided on this part of the issue. I do think ISP's are much more like utilities than are content platforms.
Don't run away, seriously, I finally found a thread with a bit of real, honest disagreement and discussion
libertysnake
.338 Win Mag
I've basically left Facebook completely. Every 5 years or so I'll go back on to see if it's still a liberal cesspool, and it always proves to be the case. I don't need horse shit like that in my life.
Tucker was right in the beginning of the video. We defeat bad arguments with good ones. We defeat bad products with good products, and good ideas. Make an alternative, or start an organization that gets "free speech commitments" from these companies so that the ones who don't commit to it look bad publicly. If you make a system to enforce certain behavior, you'll just make another "affirmative action."
It's not easy though. Just like at what they did to "gab.ai." Whenever an alternative pops up, it's immediately labeled "Alt-right" and a "haven for racism." Well, if you don't allow free speech to take place, of course both bad and good ideas will flock to a platform that actually allows for the free flow of ideas. It doesn't make the platform itself inherently racist, though.
ArmedCorgi
.475 A&M Magnum
Access to an ISP is obviously not a civil right, but the free flow of information there in, in my opinion, is. Would you find it acceptable if your paperboy redacted articles in your news paper?
Honestly, I feel like we really have similar ideas on this. It's obviously complicated, which makes it frustrating to articulate on a forum, but really I don't think we are far off from each other. I completely get where you are coming from and agree with a lot of it. I just can't abide the gross abuses caused by companies people utilize and trust for the sole purpose of free speech. Imagine if the same suppression were applied to anyone with a movable type press of a quill pen.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
I agree with @ArmedCorgi . It is a utility. It would be like a power company saying that their power that you are paying for can only be used for conservative devices. You can't use it to power your TV to watch CNN.
libertysnake
.338 Win Mag
It would be a little odd, but what if they DID include such a provision? Namely, that you're not allowed to use it to power your computer or TV if your intent is to watch fox news?
It may be unenforceable, but if they're a private company they'd be within their rights to sell to whomever they want, for whatever use cases they stipulate. That being said, I'm sure in doing so they'd lose any government funding or subsidies they're getting to perform the function of being a utility, so it wouldn't likely be in their interest.
The point being, lack of competition is the scariest thing imaginable -- and yet another reason why socialism is a garbage idea.
There a far Left reaching newspapers and there are far Right leaning newspapers. I do not want the Government to come in and say to either paper that they need to publish more stories from the opposing way of thinking.
If an ISP, for example, is limiting what the user can view, stop using that ISP.
ArmedCorgi
.475 A&M Magnum
On principle I agree, but what do you do if there is only one ISP in your area?
Not gonna like this answer...
Either suck it up and use the one that you don't like or go without the Internet.
libertysnake
.338 Win Mag
Then we're fucked. This is a very serious issue that conservatives need to be addressing by building businesses in a variety of areas. Even ones that they don't traditionally have an interest in. The lack of conservatives in tech is appalling.
ArmedCorgi
.475 A&M Magnum
I understand your answer. Do you?
ArmedCorgi
.475 A&M Magnum
We need more people like you. That is the only way we change things peacefully.
libertysnake
.338 Win Mag
We need more people having serious conversations is the issue. There's a current culture of sound bytes and over simplifications of nuanced issues. No one wants to put in the intellectual legwork to make this grand experiment work anymore.
ArmedCorgi
.475 A&M Magnum
It's not just that, but people willing to go without and deny malevolent companies revenue and by extension power.
gun_slinger_boy
.338 Win Mag
That is in the same vein as what GOPerfect is saying with suck it up or go without. I agree with this sentiment but who is putting their money where their mouth is? The way I see it there is a bunch of fake outrage. This Haven chick (with many others) is so outraged by the "silencing" but still use the products. If you're really that upset about it then close your account. If Cuomo sold a fully featured quality AR in NY that was an exception to the safe act for $100 as long as it was his brand, would you buy it?
libertysnake
.338 Win Mag
If it was his brand, the only thing to come out of it would be garbage.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Perhaps she using the only platform available to her to reach people like us. And guess what? It's working. We are talking about it. Whether that goes somewhere else is another issue.
You are doing it now. While this particular forum is conservative, the software that runs this forum that gets paid a licensing fee isn't and I'll bet the ISP that we give our money to access this forum isn't as well. You can't boycott everything.
And yes. I would buy it. Why? To use it for my purposes. To do without is shooting yourself in the foot to save face.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
We have lack of competition now. Where I live, my only choices are Spectrum, Spectrum, and Spectrum. Satellite isn't an option because my condo faces the wrong way.
I can only get water from one source. (The town) I can't dig my own well. If they were to cut my water off because of my political beliefs, how will I get it? The same goes with electricity. Sure I can move and get my own well and solar panels but what if I can't afford it and am stuck? I can do without but then the state may take my kids away for neglect.
There has to be some regulations for public utilities. An ISP is a utility.
Last edited:
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
This is a political power grab, not an ownership issue.
The recent wave of censorship of conservative voices on the internet by tech giants Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Apple mirrors a plan concocted by a coalition of George Soros-funded, progressive groups to take back power in Washington from President Trump’s administration.
A confidential, 49-page memo for defeating Trump by working with the major social-media platforms to eliminate “right wing propaganda and fake news” was presented in January 2017 by Media Matters founder David Brock at a retreat in Florida with about 100 donors, the Washington Free Beacon reported at the time.
Read more at Mask off! Social-media censor king revealed - WND - WND
Entitled “Democracy Matters: Strategic Plan for Action,” the memorandum provides an indirect analysis of the 2016 presidential election. It alleges that Hillary Clinton’s loss was the result of a sophisticated “right-wing misinformation campaign."
The memorandum blames poor online communications from Democrats for Trump's victory:
"Generally speaking and simply put, Democrats got clobbered in the digital space.
Digital programs - both tactical and messaging - failed to actively listen and engage the online grassroots universe.
The Trump camp spoke effectively to the grassroots and relied on online channels to disseminate information and misinformation and influence the media, even getting fake stories onto cable TV.
And the right colonized Facebook, which has established a virtual monopoly on information distribution."
American Bridge - a “progressive research and communications organization” and arm of the Democrat Party - promises to “cement itself as a standard-bearer of opposition research” in order to “[drive] the narrative on Republican officeholders and candidates.”
The memorandum describes “what success will look like:”
"Trump will be defeated through impeachment or at the ballot box in 2020.
The balance of power will shift back to Democrats. We will measurably impact US Senate, gubernatorial, and state legislative races
We will free ourselves from solely relying on the press. Our robust digital platform will reach voters directly online."
A partisan Democrat social media platform - “Shareblue” - is also proposed as a political communications strategy:
"Shareblue will become the de facto news outlet for opposition leaders and the grassroots.
Trump allies will be forced to step down or change course due to news published by Shareblue.
Under pressure from Shareblue, Democrats will take more aggressive positions against Trump.
Shareblue will achieve financial sustainability while diversifying content offerings and platforms.
Top editorial and writing talent will leave competitors and join Shareblue."
The memorandum outlines a strategy "to resist the normalization of Donald Trump…. [and] his every radical departure from foreign and domestic policy norms.”
Media Matters will reshape its focus to “serial misinformers and right-wing propagandists.”
Social media platforms such as Google and Facebook “will no longer uncritically and without consequence host and enrich fake news sites and propagandists," promises the memorandum.
The memorandum identifies the Media Research Center (MRC) and Breitbart as primary targets of MMFA's opposition research.
MRC is said to “reinforce the myth of a liberally biased media” while “[pushing] journalism to the right.”
Breitbart is said to be funded by “extremist billionaires,” operating as a “nexus point for the so-called alt-right (the newest branding for American white nationalism, anti-Semitism, and misogyny),” while “[exporting] its brand of anti-establishment racism on a global scale.”
Full David Brock Confidential Memo On Fighting Trump
Uploaded by Joe Schoffstall
Full David Brock confidential memo on fighting Donald Trump obtained by the Washington Free Beacon at the Jan. 19-21, 2017,
Mask off! Social-media censor king revealed - WND - WND
The recent wave of censorship of conservative voices on the internet by tech giants Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Apple mirrors a plan concocted by a coalition of George Soros-funded, progressive groups to take back power in Washington from President Trump’s administration.
A confidential, 49-page memo for defeating Trump by working with the major social-media platforms to eliminate “right wing propaganda and fake news” was presented in January 2017 by Media Matters founder David Brock at a retreat in Florida with about 100 donors, the Washington Free Beacon reported at the time.
Read more at Mask off! Social-media censor king revealed - WND - WND
Entitled “Democracy Matters: Strategic Plan for Action,” the memorandum provides an indirect analysis of the 2016 presidential election. It alleges that Hillary Clinton’s loss was the result of a sophisticated “right-wing misinformation campaign."
The memorandum blames poor online communications from Democrats for Trump's victory:
"Generally speaking and simply put, Democrats got clobbered in the digital space.
Digital programs - both tactical and messaging - failed to actively listen and engage the online grassroots universe.
The Trump camp spoke effectively to the grassroots and relied on online channels to disseminate information and misinformation and influence the media, even getting fake stories onto cable TV.
And the right colonized Facebook, which has established a virtual monopoly on information distribution."
American Bridge - a “progressive research and communications organization” and arm of the Democrat Party - promises to “cement itself as a standard-bearer of opposition research” in order to “[drive] the narrative on Republican officeholders and candidates.”
The memorandum describes “what success will look like:”
"Trump will be defeated through impeachment or at the ballot box in 2020.
The balance of power will shift back to Democrats. We will measurably impact US Senate, gubernatorial, and state legislative races
We will free ourselves from solely relying on the press. Our robust digital platform will reach voters directly online."
A partisan Democrat social media platform - “Shareblue” - is also proposed as a political communications strategy:
"Shareblue will become the de facto news outlet for opposition leaders and the grassroots.
Trump allies will be forced to step down or change course due to news published by Shareblue.
Under pressure from Shareblue, Democrats will take more aggressive positions against Trump.
Shareblue will achieve financial sustainability while diversifying content offerings and platforms.
Top editorial and writing talent will leave competitors and join Shareblue."
The memorandum outlines a strategy "to resist the normalization of Donald Trump…. [and] his every radical departure from foreign and domestic policy norms.”
Media Matters will reshape its focus to “serial misinformers and right-wing propagandists.”
Social media platforms such as Google and Facebook “will no longer uncritically and without consequence host and enrich fake news sites and propagandists," promises the memorandum.
The memorandum identifies the Media Research Center (MRC) and Breitbart as primary targets of MMFA's opposition research.
MRC is said to “reinforce the myth of a liberally biased media” while “[pushing] journalism to the right.”
Breitbart is said to be funded by “extremist billionaires,” operating as a “nexus point for the so-called alt-right (the newest branding for American white nationalism, anti-Semitism, and misogyny),” while “[exporting] its brand of anti-establishment racism on a global scale.”
Full David Brock Confidential Memo On Fighting Trump
Uploaded by Joe Schoffstall
Full David Brock confidential memo on fighting Donald Trump obtained by the Washington Free Beacon at the Jan. 19-21, 2017,
Mask off! Social-media censor king revealed - WND - WND
Last edited:
Blimey
.450/400 Nitro Ex
Short of constitutional amendment I don't see what Trump can do to compel a non-governmental platform to carry views they don't like. Most of us don't seem to think a guy should have to make a cake with his own creativity that goes against his beliefs, so same thing here.
In theory, other platforms that cater to views will pop up.
The problem is that as networks grow they become more powerful and more difficult to compete against. I often think of craigslist. Anybody who has used it knows it is a piece of shit. It is a terrible platform. Its software is crap, it's a pain to use, there is no vetting of sellers/reviews, etc. And yet it is one of the biggest market places. And I use it, too. I could come up with a superior platform tomorrow but if people don't know about it, it can't grow, then others don't hear about it, then it's just a big money loser. Why has facebook done so well year after year and other platforms like Google's various efforts have failed?
I say that because if some other group came out with an alt-youtube or an alt-facebook or whatever, none of those platforms will work without lots of subscribers, but no subscriber will come to them without lots of subscribers already being there; if you're on the forefront of a paradigm as facebook was you get the first adopter benefit and everybody else perpetually gets scraps.
So if we start a Freedombook, how are you going to get your family members or friends to join? It will just be another tell about you "Oh, you have a freedom book account, you must be a trump supporter".
In theory, other platforms that cater to views will pop up.
The problem is that as networks grow they become more powerful and more difficult to compete against. I often think of craigslist. Anybody who has used it knows it is a piece of shit. It is a terrible platform. Its software is crap, it's a pain to use, there is no vetting of sellers/reviews, etc. And yet it is one of the biggest market places. And I use it, too. I could come up with a superior platform tomorrow but if people don't know about it, it can't grow, then others don't hear about it, then it's just a big money loser. Why has facebook done so well year after year and other platforms like Google's various efforts have failed?
I say that because if some other group came out with an alt-youtube or an alt-facebook or whatever, none of those platforms will work without lots of subscribers, but no subscriber will come to them without lots of subscribers already being there; if you're on the forefront of a paradigm as facebook was you get the first adopter benefit and everybody else perpetually gets scraps.
So if we start a Freedombook, how are you going to get your family members or friends to join? It will just be another tell about you "Oh, you have a freedom book account, you must be a trump supporter".
ArmedCorgi
.475 A&M Magnum
I'm not necessarily talking about the government controlling anything and I wish we could get away from that idea. That is not what I am pushing.
The Bill of Rights as we all know is not the Government regulating anything. If anything is being regulated, it's the government itself. I think there is some confusion on here with government regulation of something verse an expansion of the protections afforded us in the 1st, 2nd or any of the amendments in the Bill of RIghts.
So to revisit what my amendment might look like, maybe making it more narrow in scope so that it basically reads something like: no government agency, entity, political party or branch of government shall conspire, contract, coerce or otherwise employ third party companys in any line of business to circumvent any enumerated rights.
That way, it's not stepping into the realm of the government getting involved and controlling anything.
On the other hand, perhaps another way to look at it is that we are basically dealing with a monopoly here. Only it's not a monopoly on oil or the rail roads, it's a monopoly on constituionally protected free speech or perhaps more precisely, the current pervasive medium through which free speech is distributed.
We have anti-trust laws so that the market will remain competitive both for the health of the economy and so that no one company can have that much power over important commodities, Etc., and by extension peoples' lives.
Last edited:
You don't think private companies are in bed with .Gov? One hand washes the other in that realm..
ProgSpear
.338 Win Mag
We are experiencing a resurgence of corporatism. Historically this has been a “go to” mode for statists of all stripes.
How about this.
When you tell a lie, your platform is shut down completely.
This goes for youtube, facebook, CBS, Fox, CNN.....
ONE lie, you are gone from public view indefinitely.
Ahhhhhhh, peace at last.
The internet would ne a wasteland of video games and NYGF.
When you tell a lie, your platform is shut down completely.
This goes for youtube, facebook, CBS, Fox, CNN.....
ONE lie, you are gone from public view indefinitely.
Ahhhhhhh, peace at last.
The internet would ne a wasteland of video games and NYGF.
Cake backing story has absolutely nothing to do with reality. The only reason it is out there is to keep people busy debating inane BS, instead of questioning governments actions and policies. Both political parties love it, it's their way of gaining support and sacrificing nothing. Remember stem cells debate and how much hot air was wasted around it by both sides. Few months later we had the biggest attack on American soil and stem cells nitwitary disappeared from the headlines.
Would you buy a cake from someone who hates your guts? Is this something going on around you? Why even focus on this shit. The only reason for this is to pit one group of Americans against another, while elites and globalists feather their nests.
Both parties shit on family values and this cake was already baked for you long time ago. Bon Appetit.
Would you buy a cake from someone who hates your guts? Is this something going on around you? Why even focus on this shit. The only reason for this is to pit one group of Americans against another, while elites and globalists feather their nests.
Both parties shit on family values and this cake was already baked for you long time ago. Bon Appetit.
Last edited:
Robin
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Teddy Roosevelt was the "Trust Buster"! I don't see any real difference, They need to be busted up right now it is Tech tyranny in league with the deep state.
Robin
Robin