Potemkin wrote:Facebook is a privately owned platform. They can ban anyone they want from it, for any length of time they want, for any reason they want, or for no reason at all. Or do you believe that Facebook is a public good which should be nationalised and taken under public ownership...?
You think so? Try banning black people. Try banning women. Try banning immigrants. Try banning people of a particular religion. Try banning homosexuals. Facebook is a publicly traded company. It has to abide by rules. You're watching way too much television if you believe something like that. Congress has plenary authority to regulate interstate commerce.
Goranhammer wrote: It is starting to appear that these tech giants are being at least partially nationalized.
They are probably going to get regulated like public utilities at some point, as shareholders are not going to want to see their equity positions diminished by arbitrary leftists within corporate America.
Unthinking Majority wrote:Ya but he also kept lying by saying that the election was stolen and rigged, and then tons of people believed him and some stormed the Capital. So fuck him, he's no victim he's a dictator.
It was stolen. He's not a dictator. He's a private citizen.
Juin wrote:I see say Facebook as no different from the East India Company.
Well, they don't have their own army yet.
Juin wrote:I say the likes of Facebook are the equivalent of the ole East India Company. They dominate the cyber space the way the East India Company dominated India.
They are just another CIA-funded operation that blew back on them in ways they didn't expect. They were hoping to use six-degrees-of-separation type stuff to get to bin Laden, push the Arab Spring, etc. They did not expect that Al Qaeda would use it to radicalize others, or that populists would end up fighting the establishment. So now they are coming up with arbitrary rules and trying to enforce them in hopes that it will shape public opinion. It is. However, like blowback, it's shaping public opinion in a way that they didn't expect.
Juin wrote:In the future I envision if a Trump gonna be shut down it will be under rules set by regular constituted authorities.
It's a bit of a side show. YouTube and their likes induce people into creating content on their platform, and then later make rules in an arbitrary manner. These are considered "adhesion contracts" in other scenarios, where bargaining power is so lopsided as to be manifestly unfair. So I think their ability to make platform rules will come under scrutiny, and they may become liable for damages in some cases.
ccdan wrote:Private companies that offer their services or products to the public are subjected to all kinds of rules and regulations so that they don't do harmful or illegitimate things that can affect the public.
I think he knows that. He's just trolling.
Istanbuller wrote:But let's face it that Trump intended to start a riot.
Yes, but he told them to be peaceful and obey law enforcement. The establishment got a whole lot less than it deserved for the Red Mirage. They are scared now, and they should be. Constitutions are just words on paper. If people don't believe them, they are worthless--like hyperinflated currency.
The Resister wrote:Whether Trump had a role in the Capitol march or anything else for that matter, he has an unalienable Right to a Freedom of Speech. Whether Trump had anything to do directly with what happened at the Capitol is irrelevant to me. He said he would be there and instead of leading his flock, he was in the rear with the gear, hiding out in the comfort of his office.
Even Trump supporters like InfoWars founder, Alex Jones, were out there with bullhorns telling people not to break any laws, not to be violent, etc. Either way, I don't care because I don't like the American political establishment and I find it highly amusing how scared they are now. The protesters weren't even armed. The establishment knows that it's skating on thin ice, but it doesn't know how to course correct.
It's hysterical. Nancy Pelosi is a complete tyrannical cunt in calling for endless investigations of her political dissidents. Meanwhile, Sergey Lavrov makes fun of the Biden administration for obvious human rights violations by keeping peaceful protesters in solitary confinement before trial when they are no danger to anyone. The Democrats hate the US constitution (along with some lily livered Republicans). The establishment has made a joke of the Bill of Rights, while pushing things like men playing women's sports as transgenders. Who wants to be ruled by these clowns anymore? I certainly do not.
The Resister wrote:I'm just asking the question as to why Trump (and / or his supporters) can't raise a little money and start a competitor site for Facebook. How come Trump supporters haven't just boycotted Facebook?
A lot have. They've even boycotted news outlets. Have you seen their ratings? Utterly in the toilet. YouTubers get more views than Don Lemon gets. The only thing holding FoxNews up is Tucker Carlson. Establishment Republicans like Paul Ryan have ruined what FoxNews had in terms of political influence. Mark Dice gets literally twice the views from videos he makes in his kitchen as Don Lemon's ratings backed by the mega broadcasting institutional resources of CNN. It's hilarious.
"We have put together the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics."
-- Joe Biden