What will become of Parler?
- Thread starter Mad Mike
- Start date
Doesn't answer the question at all..you're confusing "social media" with "media". And even if social media decides to remove something someone posts or whatever isn't impacting someones free speech. Social media (or a forum like GTAM, right here) is not a place where you can exercise free speech. If you think it is, I suggest you go re-read that little "Terms Of Service" thing you almost certainly scrolled through and clicked "I accept" to without ever reading it. And then go refresh yourself on exactly what free speech and freedom of expression ACTUALLY are. And after you've done that, read about how private companies and organizations are not bound to allow you "free speech" on their platforms.
It's clear you don't actually understand what free speech actually is, and how it works.
A quick lesson on what free speech is:
The fact you're not in jail for some of your political posts you've made on a public-facing forum like GTAM means you have free speech.
The fact the moderators here (or on social media) decide to delete something you've posted because they decided to for whatever reason they damn well so please (being a private company, and all) is NOT imposing on your free speech.
You need to stop connecting the two.
It's clear you don't actually understand what free speech actually is, and how it works.
A quick lesson on what free speech is:
The fact you're not in jail for some of your political posts you've made on a public-facing forum like GTAM means you have free speech.
The fact the moderators here (or on social media) decide to delete something you've posted because they decided to for whatever reason they damn well so please (being a private company, and all) is NOT imposing on your free speech.
You need to stop connecting the two.
pfbmgd
Well-known member
I think the videos explains in simple terms. There is a bigger picture you just don't get .
The video is "simple" all right.
Again, for fear of sounding like a broken record, you do NOT seem to get what free speech is. You can try all you want to make it something it isn't, but reality isn't going to change to suit you.
Again, for fear of sounding like a broken record, you do NOT seem to get what free speech is. You can try all you want to make it something it isn't, but reality isn't going to change to suit you.
pfbmgd
Well-known member
I don't need it to suit me . Just because YOU don't get it . The videos explains it in layman terms . If that does not compute nothing will with you .
You don’t understand and you don’t WANT to understand because it conflicts with your preconceived views and opinions.
Thats the issue here.
Thats the issue here.
Ok, thppft, this will explain to you in layman's terms why the comedian's video you posted has nothing to do with actual free speech, not your interpretation of it. Whether it finally sinks in is debatable.
You can stand on the sidewalk and scream at the top of your lungs out front of (for example) Canadian Tire about how the independant owner is a nozzle that hires hack mechanics and employs draconian loss prevention methods. As long as you don't bring his ethnicity, gender, sexual preference into it (hate speech), you're good to carry on ranting. If you go inside the business and continue with said rant, the owner is well within his rights to toss you back on to said sidewalk and have you served with a no trespass order where you will be arrested if you do it again. The video by the comedian you posted is him basically whining about not being able to go on Twitter/Facebook/Instagram/etc. and rant (the equivalent of being inside the above mentioned Canadian Tire), and is going to migrate to Parler [D'oh] where he can say whatever he pleases (the equivalent of the sidewalk in front of the above mentioned Canadian Tire).
That said, I have a crisp Twenty here that says you still won't get it, even with it laid out for you on a silver platter.
You can stand on the sidewalk and scream at the top of your lungs out front of (for example) Canadian Tire about how the independant owner is a nozzle that hires hack mechanics and employs draconian loss prevention methods. As long as you don't bring his ethnicity, gender, sexual preference into it (hate speech), you're good to carry on ranting. If you go inside the business and continue with said rant, the owner is well within his rights to toss you back on to said sidewalk and have you served with a no trespass order where you will be arrested if you do it again. The video by the comedian you posted is him basically whining about not being able to go on Twitter/Facebook/Instagram/etc. and rant (the equivalent of being inside the above mentioned Canadian Tire), and is going to migrate to Parler [D'oh] where he can say whatever he pleases (the equivalent of the sidewalk in front of the above mentioned Canadian Tire).
That said, I have a crisp Twenty here that says you still won't get it, even with it laid out for you on a silver platter.
pfbmgd
Well-known member
I like the slight with my handle . Shows your intelligence level . I guess the two of you don't get it . FB, Twitter and Parler are todays sidewalk . Most people get their information from these places . When they block content on their sites they are suppressing free speech . The perfect example was the story from the NYpost about Bidens son . FB and Twitter both locked that story out . They claim false information but their platforms are full of hate and false information . But they decide what you can see, hear and what version of the truth you get .
BTW JP is on the platforms you mention . Making fun of people like you and the other one . You guys along with the techs giants people are to dumb to see he is making fun of you . Just because YOU DON'T GET IT .
Send the twenty to a charity . I doubt you will .
I don't think the, "it's a private company, their company, their rules" is the correct mentality moving forward. It is clear something needs to be done, and probably not what anti-censorship people want.
At this point in time Twitter/FB/Youtube have a somewhat monopoly on social media communication. With that, they hold a responsibility to what information is shared on their platforms, and how that information is promoted. It's clear these companies have zero desire to do anything unless absolutely forced. A good portion of their business comes from people/bots that share information that probably should be regulated, but by blocking (or at least pretending to) these people and ideas, they are cutting off revenue which no private company wants to do.
If the above companies were forced to seriously moderate the content on their platforms, it is unlikely that ideas such as alt-right/Q/Covid denial/flat earth/etc have reached the level that they have. Deplatforming works, just look at the change in discourse after Twitter blocked Trump. Or for those that remember a few years back, Alex Jones.
I have no idea what the answer is, moderation of the platforms needs to be balanced with free speech rights. Something needs to be done though.
Remember a time when these types of discussions were over a few beers and everyone was cool afterwards? This is what we need. I miss those times. You guys need to grab a beer.
I KNEW you wouldn't get it. You need to agree to a ToS (rules of use) or you won't be allowed to use FB and Twitter. It's the same as when going into a store you agree not to steal/pull the fire alarm on a whim/accost other customers or you aren't welcome inside. Out on the sidewalk is where you can do as you please (up to the point where you break a law).
I didn't lose. It's
Most people shouldn’t get their information from those sources....that’s the issue. I know well enough that the social media “news” is many rungs down the ladder from what’s actually important.
I'm not going to remember some random series of letters or some arcane acronym that only you know the meaning of, and I'm not about to memorize it or scroll to look for it when I reply (why?) to you. I'll settle for my mind defaulting to Bill the Cat when referencing you.
pfbmgd
Well-known member
You are partially there . The " alt-right/Q/Covid denial/flat earth/etc " is a distraction .
Where are these alt right poeple can you seem them ?
But you took all the time to write your drivel . Smart .I'm not going to remember some random series of letters or some arcane acronym that only you know the meaning of, and I'm not about to memorize it or scroll to look for it when I reply (why?) to you. I'll settle for my mind defaulting to Bill the Cat when referencing you.
pfbmgd
Well-known member
Not the same . That is why you don't get it . They hide behind their rules . They banned Trump but not China or Iran . The say that they are a platform they don't create the posts . But they control what is allowed even if it contradicts their rules . Just like the example below . A known anti Semite is still on twitter .
https://twitter.com/louisfarrakhan
I find this stuff very interesting.
Having read through the suit that Parler filed, the response from AWS and then the counter response from Parler I think they will get a big settlement as it seems to me that AWS are in breech of service. Will they use that money to try and stay afloat, or just pocket it and walk away? I really don’t know.
The more cynical side of me, and there is no proof of this, thinks that Twitter may have had their fingers in this. They are AWS largest customer and it was a good opportunity to get rid of a small up and coming competitor.
Having read through the suit that Parler filed, the response from AWS and then the counter response from Parler I think they will get a big settlement as it seems to me that AWS are in breech of service. Will they use that money to try and stay afloat, or just pocket it and walk away? I really don’t know.
The more cynical side of me, and there is no proof of this, thinks that Twitter may have had their fingers in this. They are AWS largest customer and it was a good opportunity to get rid of a small up and coming competitor.
Exactly. Their rules. Paul could ban you from GTAM because he doesn't like your haircut. You have zero recourse. It's EXACTLY the same, other than the size of the pond.
And it’s all within the laws of free speech.
the only issue is that there is a huge population that looks to FB, Twitter and Reddit for their daily dose of news. As such they may be forced to be judged to a higher standard.
but in the end....their playground....their rules.
Judge says Amazon won't have to restore Parler web service
Amazon won't be forced to immediately restore web service to Parler after a federal judge ruled Thursday against a plea to reinstate the fast-growing social media app, which is favored by followers of former President Donald Trump.
apnews.com
That's their fault.
