Hiku said:
DonFerrari said:
Don't you follow their holier than thou attitude and what not?
Sorry, sure all companies reason for exisiting is profit, but if a company isn't based on values and follow them, they go down.
People them aren't even reading OP.
|
I don't know what holier than thou attitude you're referring to. I saw their statement regarding their policy on hate speech, child endangerment, and harassment. They specifically said they believe in representing a "wide range of views so long as *insert conditions*" Is that it? You were talking about freedom of speech, while criticizing other posters for not considering it, so I'm asking you to clarify what it is you're referring to, and what your issue with it is, so that we can discuss it.
|
So what do you say when they don't ban pages that preach violence and death for police, men, white, etc? I know several pages that do it daily, had several people organized to do over 10k reports in a single day, and all have been replied with "it doesn't violate the terms of the service", even though it is very specific term talking against inciting criminal behavior and violence.
The whole net neutrality in Brazil sponsored include by those companies were because of freedom of speech and no government control (even if they want government to legislate saying it won't legislate).
I ask again, show the hundred of left wing pages sweep down in a single day by any of these platforms.
deskpro2k3 said:
Good, that guy is a nut job. Anything that incites violence, division, and hate content should be removed and banned.
Free speech isn't free of consequences. Here are the types of speech that are not protected by the First Amendment:
- Obscenity
- Fighting words
- Defamation (including libel and slander)
- Child pornography
- Perjury
- Blackmail
- Incitement to imminent lawless action
- True threats
- Solicitations to commit crimes
The Supreme Court should add treason to this list.
People that are saying that this violates his first amendment rights just don't know what the hell they're talking about.
|
I think you know even less what freedom of speech is. Because one of the requests for freedom of speech is that is made public and the one saying it shows himself. Half or more of what you are putting there doesn't happen in the open, and movements like BLM have several of their claims made with something covering their faces.
o_O.Q said:
irstupid said:
It's a slipery slope.
I have a friend who was a bouncer at a bar and he said they refused to let anyone in who for instance had a baseball cap on backwards. Couldn't even just turn it around or take it off, you were pegged and until they forgot about you, you would be refused entry. They did that because people who wore their hat backwards were more likely to cause trouble at the bar.
I'm sure you wouldn't have to search very far to find someone on the internet that would claim that doing so is racists.
So is the bar wrong for having a guideline about no backwards hats? Who decides what youtube/facebook/ect deems as inappropriate speech? The world has become so partisan/party affiliated that you will have the same people defending Rosseane attack Gunn, and vise versa solely because said person they deems as on "their side". Who determines what someone says on the internet is a joke, or not. Or is a hypothetical or not?
|
i can't speak for anyone else but i do think businesses should be allowed to discriminate on whatever criteria they want, including race
i think discrimination laws, hate speech laws etc etc etc should all be thrown in the bin
for one thing, they don't actually change the views of the people they are pushed on (and there's loads of evidence that they actually make things worse)
|
As long as that company is open about its discrimination I don't bother as well, they may do as much as they want for whatever reason they choose. But these platforms aren't open about it, and public lie about their conduct, plus also break their own TOS depending on the side of the argument.
pokoko said: I'm still amazed that there are people who do not understand that free speech does not apply to private forums. The first stop of anyone defending Alex Jones should be to discuss why the things Alex Jones is accused of doing do not deserve the punishment that has been handed out. However, I've yet to see any of his defenders in this thread make a case whatsoever. Honestly, the guy needs to reclassify as entertainment. It's just mind boggling that anyone takes him seriously. This is the guy that hinted Obama was actually a demon. A DEMON. |
We had pages in Brazil saying Bolsonaro tortured children during the Military Government in the begining of it (1964), even though he was a 5 year old himself.
Chris Hu said:
Pemalite said: Free speech has never entitled you to say whatever you desire without restriction, compromise or consequence anyway. Personally I believe that anyone who propagates fake news, conspiracy theories and the like should be shut down, regardless of who it is... Left or Right wing. - But... It should also be done in a a more transparent manner, like a tribunal where these outlets can defend themselves with empirical evidence. Left Wing outlets like "The Young Turks" should also be heavily scrutinized. |
No they shouldn't nobody on the left is as crazy as Alex Jones. The guy is insane snake oil salesman that does nothing more then tell lies, alternate facts and pushes crazy right wing conspiracy theories like pizza gate, frogs being turned gay by water, that Hillary is possessed by demons and other kind of crazy BS.
|
See the reply above.
Yes left wing have as much crazy guys as right wing. Or do you think a 5y old could be a military torturing child?
farlaff said:
DonFerrari said: Took a single reply to have someone defending it kkkkk. In Brazil the left wing also was defending a similar system. Facebook obviously had it interest in it as well. Couple weeks ago FB banned hundred pages and profiles of right wing posters under a "hunt on fakenews", not a single left winged person or page was take down. But the left wing swears there was no bias on FB action. |
What are you talking about? They removed MBL's pages, notorious for spreading hate and fake news. I'm not a left wing partisan, and I say you should stop posting biased and not true information.
|
If you aren't left wing I'm sure you can think of dozen of outlets that spread hate and fake news from the left side and didn't got banned.
I'll give one quite big, Quebrando Tabu.
Also you have no place on telling me to stop doing anything (even more when I'm not doing it, and at most your lack of knowledge is the reason you think I'm).
LiquorandGunFun said: he is a dumbass, but the right to free speech doesnt stop at someones feelings. there needs to be significant repercussions for these shit headed companies. |
Don't say that... you don't have the right to say something that I may not like.
OdinHades said: Next time I'm getting banned at vgchartz for saying that Xbox sucks or something, I will cry all day long about censorship, free speech and shit. Seriously, get yourselves together.
|
You would be banned again for mod complaining =p
Like a month ago several newspaper decided to create a "consortium" to hunt fake news in Brazil to prevent it from influencing the election. Half the sponsors/participants were publishers of fake news from the left wing themselves, and would never acknowledge their own fake news.
And on the public interview for the presidential candidates they would take like 80% of the time to ask about things from 30 years in the past and also try to demonize the candidate.
But yes... only right wing have bad behavior. Some people are so blind that it's sad.