Keri Hilson getting killed for Trump tweet: Is she right though ???

[peterlongshort]

I don't think anyone is really disagreeing with your stance on companies having monopolies. However, that is different than freedom of speech and there are already laws against having monopolies.

That is part of the reason these companies are being constantly brought before congress. The government doesn't like the fact that these tech companies have so much indirect control. Them caring about your privacy is bullshit and at best they want easier access to the data those companies have on us.

This is the danger. You had TOS 4 years ago, and you let him violate them at every step of the way. Charlottesville, George Floyd, Covid....every fuckin step of the way. Now all of a sudden you have a TOS. If the enforement is not consistent then it’s not a rule! It’s whatever you say it is that day.

And this is the trick they play on you “Oh we gonna ban hate speech, Farrakhan and Alex Jones, ya’ll banned. Alex who? That’s not the same!!! The impact is different. No one is gonna miss fuckin Alex Jones.
I’m watching this shit because we have some brothas making some really good content and gaining momentum. I’m not trying to see it shutdown. Ya’ll do your white KKK shit over there, we’ll do our B1 shit over here, and I’ll see you on the fuckin field. *end rant*

 

[BigDaddyBuk]

Nope. Defamation, libel, slander are all common law torts, there is no Federal libel slander, etc, counterpart. Section 230 does not give immunitty of other federal laws, such as copyright, kiddie porn, shit like that. Many have tried to climb that mountain, everyone has failed.

You need to do more research. That last sentence is patently, demonstrably false.

Defamation lawsuits against Facebook are ongoing in the U.S. and have already been won in other countries with GLOBAL application, meaning Facebook is culpable in the US.

The partner of a protester who was shot and killed in Kenosha is suing Facebook alleging it enabled paramilitary violence against protesters

The federal lawsuit says the social media company was negligent when it failed to take down an event page urging armed vigilantes to attend protests.

www.businessinsider.com

Facebook loses final appeal in defamation takedown case, must remove same and similar hate posts globally | TechCrunch

Austria's Supreme Court has dismissed Facebook's appeal in a long running speech takedown case -- ruling it must remove references to defamatory comments

techcrunch.com

 

[peterlongshort]

You need to do more research. That last sentence is patently, demonstrably false.

Defamation lawsuits against Facebook are ongoing in the U.S. and have already been won in other countries with GLOBAL application, meaning Facebook is culpable in the US.

The partner of a protester who was shot and killed in Kenosha is suing Facebook alleging it enabled paramilitary violence against protesters

The federal lawsuit says the social media company was negligent when it failed to take down an event page urging armed vigilantes to attend protests.

www.businessinsider.com

Facebook loses final appeal in defamation takedown case, must remove same and similar hate posts globally | TechCrunch

Austria's Supreme Court has dismissed Facebook's appeal in a long running speech takedown case -- ruling it must remove references to defamatory comments

techcrunch.com

There have been no wins in the United States of America sir. None. Zero. Show me one

 

[BigDaddyBuk]

There have been no wins in the United States of America sir. None. Zero. Show me one

Lol...I like how you changed no one has won to no one in the US has won.

Thanks for conceding that point.

Also, not every challenge has failed. Which is my point: you CAN sue Facebook for hosting defamatory content.

We don't know if its impossible to win against them.

 

[peterlongshort]

Lol...I like how you changed no one has won to no one in the US has won.

Thanks for conceding that point.

Also, not every challenge has failed. Which is my point: you CAN sue Facebook for hosting defamatory content.

We don't know if its impossible to win against them.

I'm talking about Section 230, this is US law. This is how they get away with shit. I don't know if other countries have a 230, but this one does and it ain't no getting around it. You can sue, but no one has won.

Meanwhile, I don't know if you remember Retlaw....ok, let me leave that alone....

 

[guyver]

Eh...I dunno bout that. The internet is a huge part of our daily lives. All the major internet companies scrubbing your presence from their platforms within 48 hours of each other should be concerning.

Again that is not a freedom of speech issue as far as the amendment. That would be companies colluding or running a monopoly at best.

I'm not saying the tech companies having this much control isn't an issue. I'm saying the freedom of speech amendment is not speaking to the issue some people here are speaking about. I also agree that the internet should be treated like a public utility.

Like someone already said these companies aren't necessarily doing these things because they care about social justice or issues. They are doing it to avoid liability for actions taken by others. Facebook was already being accused of some how controlling political views on their platform and were dragged in by congress. Why would any company risk being held accountable for actions outside of their control.

 

[BigDaddyBuk]

I'm talking about Section 230, this is US law. This is how they get away with shit. I don't know if other countries have a 230, but this one does and it ain't no getting around it. You can sue, but no one has won.

Meanwhile, I don't know if you remember Retlaw....ok, let me leave that alone....

Oh, youve already conceded the point and clarified, thanks.

Is it impossible for a plaintiff to win a defamation case against Facebook for statements made by a user of their platform?

 

[guyver]

This is the danger. You had TOS 4 years ago, and you let him violate them at every step of the way. Charlottesville, George Floyd, Covid....every fuckin step of the way. Now all of a sudden you have a TOS. If the enforement is not consistent then it’s not a rule! It’s whatever you say it is that day.

And this is the trick they play on you “Oh we gonna ban hate speech, Farrakhan and Alex Jones, ya’ll banned. Alex who? That’s not the same!!! The impact is different. No one is gonna miss fuckin Alex Jones.
I’m watching this shit because we have some brothas making some really good content and gaining momentum. I’m not trying to see it shutdown. Ya’ll do your white KKK shit over there, we’ll do our B1 shit over here, and I’ll see you on the fuckin field. *end rant*

There is no law/rule alive that is consistently followed. You're basically saying we shouldn't have any laws or rules because people aren't treated te same.

You say Alex who, but just like you feel strongly about Farrakhan there are people who feel just as strongly about him. You're pretty much agreeing with what you are complaining about by downplaying what happens to one person vs another. If your argument is that rules should be enforced equally it shouldn't matter to you what impact Alex Jones has on you or not. Your focus would clearly be on your interpretation of the freedom of speech amendment.

Before you try it, in no way do I support Alex or care that he was banned. I also don't particularly care about Farrakhan being banned either. At a high level I agree that tech companies should not have a monopoly on the ecosystem. I disagree that the core issue is that Freedom of speech is being violated by these companies based on the current laws.

 

[LordSinister]

What if I bought all of the houses on the block, then the neighborhood, then the city, then the county, then the state. Where will you go then?

2-3 companies control 95% of the social media market. If Zukerberg wanted too he could give HNIC a cool 5 million for this site and shut it down the next day. No more BGOL.

There's nothing stopping you from making your own BGOL.

If we were hosting child porn in the basement, would you be complaining if HNIC's ISP shut us down?

Trumps bullshit led to at least 5 deaths and an insurrection.

Free speech ain't that free.

 

[peterlongshort]

We Agree!!

There is no law/rule alive that is consistently followed. You're basically saying we shouldn't have any laws or rules because people aren't treated te same.

You say Alex who, but just like you feel strongly about Farrakhan there are people who feel just as strongly about him. You're pretty much agreeing with what you are complaining about by downplaying what happens to one person vs another. If your argument is that rules should be enforced equally it shouldn't matter to you what impact Alex Jones has on you or not. Your focus would clearly be on your interpretation of the freedom of speech amendment.

Before you try it, in no way do I support Alex or care that he was banned. I also don't particularly care about Farrakhan being banned either. At a high level I agree that tech companies should not have a monopoly on the ecosystem. I disagree that the core issue is that Freedom of speech is being violated by these companies based on the current laws.

We agree!! This has nothing to do with freedom of speech. I’ve said that a million times. This is about access to information. These are private companies with more power than the government. Farrakan and Jones was too obvious. They wanted to get rid of him and threw in a low level white boy for window dressing, but that was the play all along.

FOS is a red herring, this is about freedom to access to information.

 

[peterlongshort]

There's nothing stopping you from making your own BGOL.

If we were hosting child porn in the basement, would you be complaining if HNIC's ISP shut us down?

Trumps bullshit led to at least 5 deaths and an insurrection.

Free speech ain't that free.

I agree. I could go elsewhere.

 

[peterlongshort]

Oh, youve already conceded the point and clarified, thanks.

Is it impossible for a plaintiff to win a defamation case against Facebook for statements made by a user of their platform?

Right now, it’s a losing battle. I’ve reviewed alot of the old Bell Tech cases when the government declared telephone service a public utility and took them over. The fed courts have given them a lot of rope.

 

[roblo]

So we jump to pedos from this shit? Everyone who is objective about this knows rules are being selectively applied. Which is cool to some, until they do it to you. "B-b-b-b-ut that's different. We have a reason to do what we do or say what we say." Yeah right, until some cac hippies say you don't.

This ain't about the fucking rules. This about who does it. Wish people would cut the fucking 'it's the rules' shit. Just be open and admit you are for selective enforcement of the TOS. Nothing wrong with that. That's how you feel. But don't hide behind 'it's the rules'. And don't complain when these folks turn on us. Could be next year. Could be 5 years from now. But it will happen.

This is how all power grabs work man. They pick a target folks don't like and do shit to them. The humanoids clap like seals. Those in control then slowly expand power. They get to tell us what we can and cannot say. They get to tell us what to be upset about. They get to tell us what to talk about. They get to say when and where they apply THEIR rules.

You cool with that shit? Posting from a site that basically would be classified as hate by the same fucking people? Swear this shit would be hilarious if it weren't so sad. So yeah, people in their emotions if they can't see posting these opinions from BGOL is fucking crazy.

You are absolutely correct. But these fools are sleep and do not wish to wake up. Never do they look at the macro perspective.

 

[LordSinister]

You are absolutely correct. But these fools are sleep and do not wish to wake up. Never do they look at the macro perspective.

Wrong.

Does Kobe, Lebron, Jordan and Steph get calls other regular players don't get?

Why?

Capitalism is why.

Trump draws followers and views to social media. They could have banned him for the Obama birth certificate bullshit, but they didn't. He made them money and they turned a blind eye to his shit.

Now, he's fucking with the bottom line and they are shitting on him.

From a person that worked in the industry, the treatment you get with a number 1 album vs underground hero is glaring.

Trump almost upended the us government. No CEO or corporation wants that bullshit. Period.

Get out you feelings

 

[roblo]

Wrong.

Does Kobe, Lebron, Jordan and Steph get calls other regular players don't get?

Why?

Capitalism is why.

Trump draws followers and views to social media. They could have banned him for the Obama birth certificate bullshit, but they didn't. He made them money and they turned a blind eye to his shit.

Now, he's fucking with the bottom line and they are shitting on him.

From a person that worked in the industry, the treatment you get with a number 1 album vs underground hero is glaring.

Trump almost upended the us government. No CEO or corporation wants that bullshit. Period.

Get out you feelings

No feelings, just looking at big picture.

 

[crossovernegro]

Bullshit; fools think that only they are awake and able to look at the big picture. Couldn't possibly be that others look at the issues involved and come up with different conclusions.

You are absolutely correct. But these fools are sleep and do not wish to wake up. Never do they look at the macro perspective.

 

[gene cisco]

Rules are always selectively applied... that's why trump wasn't banned sooner. They gave that mufucka a wide ass berth for the last 4 years. Now that's over and he's out. No emotions here... he should have been banned earlier, and now he is.

Yeah, I used nambla because it's a group that nobody outside of the ACLU is gonna try to cape for, but when it boils down to it, the scenario I described can be used to parallel this one, but nobody is gonna be using those "but what about this or that" argument when it comes to pedos.

So you're cool with these tech guys controlling politics? You trust them?

Oh well, can't wait to see the arguments when decentralization gets more popular. Folks going to be for China/Russia type of controls.

 

[zod16]

Wrong.

Does Kobe, Lebron, Jordan and Steph get calls other regular players don't get?

Why?

Capitalism is why.

Trump draws followers and views to social media. They could have banned him for the Obama birth certificate bullshit, but they didn't. He made them money and they turned a blind eye to his shit.

Now, he's fucking with the bottom line and they are shitting on him.

From a person that worked in the industry, the treatment you get with a number 1 album vs underground hero is glaring.

Trump almost upended the us government. No CEO or corporation wants that bullshit. Period.

Get out you feelings

Orange cac drove 10-15 over the limit consistently and finally got pulled over for doing 20 over. Nothing unfair or unjust about that. A lot of smart dummy responses to this.

 

[crossovernegro]

Tech guys controlling politics? How are they controlling politics? You let zuckerberg, Dorsey, Bezos or John Matze (Parler) control your political views, knowledge or choices?
If people are letting social media and tech CEOs control their individual politics, then THAT is the problem. I didn't need twitter to tell me that trump is a supreme asshole.

So you're cool with these tech guys controlling politics? You trust them?

Oh well, can't wait to see the arguments when decentralization gets more popular. Folks going to be for China/Russia type of controls.

 

[gene cisco]

Facts

Germany and France Oppose Trump’s Twitter Exile

Germany and France attacked Twitter Inc. and Facebook Inc. after U.S. President Donald Trump was shut off from the social media platforms, in an extension of Europe’s battle with big tech.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel objected to the decisions, saying on Monday that lawmakers should set the rules governing free speech and not private technology companies.

Now ain't this a bitch. Jack Dorsey is basically calling this a dangerous precedent and admits to inconsistencies in enforcement. He also addressed the 'create your own' narrative when he said that was challenged this week by the bullshit AWS pulled. He basically wants a decentralized twitter to get away from this censorship bullshit. He is a bitcoin guy after all.

The guy who took part in this basically conceded all the points. Got to love being right.

Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey: Trump ban was right but sets a 'dangerous' precedent

Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey has defended his company's decision to ban President Donald Trump, while acknowledging that the move stems from its failure to promote "healthy" conversations and sets a "dangerous" precedent.

www.cnn.com

Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey has defended his company's decision to ban President Donald Trump, while acknowledging that the move stems from its failure to promote "healthy" conversations and sets a "dangerous" precedent.

"The check and accountability on this power has always been the fact that a service like Twitter is one small part of the larger public conversation happening across the internet," he said. "If folks do not agree with our rules and enforcement, they can simply go to another internet service."

"This concept was challenged last week when a number of foundational internet tool providers also decided not to host what they found dangerous," he continued.

Dorsey suggested in his posts that the tech industry's actions could have longer term implications, too.
"This moment in time might call for this dynamic, but over the long term it will be destructive to the noble purpose and ideals of the open internet. A company making a business decision to moderate itself is different from a government removing access, yet can feel much the same," Dorsey said.
"Yes, we all need to look critically at inconsistencies of our policy and enforcement. Yes, we need to look at how our service might incentivize distraction and harm. Yes, we need more transparency in our moderation operations. All this can't erode a free and open global internet," he added.

 

[ghoststrike]

1A was never absolute without consequences

Lots of people quote the Constitution without reading comprehension

 

[peterlongshort]

Just a few years back, the FCC was like...nah, broadband is NOT a utility. ...now if Broadband is not a utility, a social media company riding on its pipes???? They're gonna have a hell of a fight making that argument stick if they are not ready to make those pipes a utility. ....and if/when they do, that will be one thing....but they aren't there yet, right?

Also, the people that fund parler have damn near unlimited resources, so this is a business opportunity for them to buy some hosting company out or create their own so they can Q to their heart's content.

Don’t know how I missed this.
That’s going to be interesting. Especially if the cordcutting trend continues.