Election thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HANZO

Don't know what Twitter gains from banning Trump, this will just piss off Republicans even more and cause greater divide.

Ofcourse there is also the arguement that Twitter is a private platform, Trump's tweets probably went against their terms and conditions. Trump just has to communicate the old fashion way through TV and Radio.

---

there's no 'divide' for people that aren't addicted to the internet. Twitter owes Trump nothing as a private company and most of the country think this shit's stupid and dramatic (though I support it cause I like chaos). All of this dumb ass 'divide' shit is just on the internet and internet based ppl will every now and then act on it but it's like a pack of crack heads talking about how we're going to worsting the crack drought. The people it's a problem too are the only ones this invested.

I think it's also ridiculous when republicans turn commie and start talking about what companies should and shouldn't do. It's literally a cumswapping organization trying to make money. If the p r e s i d e n t is dependent on it for sending messages that's his problem.

Twitter is not just a private company and it’s ridiculous to see them that way. They are essentially media at this point and need to be regulated as such. Twitter, Facebook, youtube are all extremely powerful platforms that can direct and change public opinion and it’s extremely dangerous to have them going rogue on free speech.

You don't have the right are shouldn't expect to have someone provide you an platform for your speech. Think of it as a letter to editor in a newspaper. They have the right to print what they want. A website makes money on advertisement the same and they have to do what is in the best interest.

Wasn't Trump continuously calling on his cult to boycott everything. NBA.NFL, Fox news,etc. So now they don't like it when they are the target.

Facebook, twitter and YouTube can determine elections on their own and it happened in Australia in the last federal election so of course they have to provide an impartial stance. It’s funny because the other side were complaining that media and YouTube were remove all traces of the Portland riots continuing to the point where most people didn’t know they were still happening but now it’s happening to the Trumpites then it’s a beautiful thing. It’s an extremely dangerous path to allow Zuckerberg to determine what is and what isn’t and what can and can’t be.

LOL these websites make money from selling your data the bowing down to advertisers is such nonsense they will
put their ads anywhere there’s attention.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Hound

Twitter is not just a private company and it’s ridiculous to see them that way. They are essentially media at this point and need to be regulated as such. Twitter, Facebook, youtube are all extremely powerful platforms that can direct and change public opinion and it’s extremely dangerous to have them going rogue on free speech.

---

They’re 100% violating antitrust laws, especially Google. But Facebook as well.

If those company’s weren’t monopolies, it’s be one thing. But the market can’t compete.

But Biden is in bed with Facebook, so it’s up to progressives like Bernie to decide to rock the boat. On principal he should, that’s been his whole career going after “billlionaires”.

Bernie kinda has them by the balls on this one. If he wants to make that move.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by b-dolo

You don't have the right are shouldn't expect to have someone provide you an platform for your speech. Think of it as a letter to editor in a newspaper. They have the right to print what they want. A website makes money on advertisement the same and they have to do what is in the best interest.

Wasn't Trump continuously calling on his cult to boycott everything. NBA.NFL, Fox news,etc. So now they don't like it when they are the target.

---

Yes......But all these organisations are being openly biased against Trump because their beloved Hollywood Hillary didn’t get elected. Trump should be afforded the same rights as anyone else (Maybe even more because he was the president).

Your rights are only protected for sex,race,religion. Basically for who you are not protected for what you do, like incite riots which Trump did.

This is the world that b-dolo wants to live in

World marks 30 years since Tiananmen massacre as China censors all mention

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/06/03/a...ntl/index.html

^ Fair comparison...

It wasn't a comparison it's an example of what the future holds when you allow the likes of facebook, twitter, youtube, even the CCP's very own discord to start censoring and determining what can and can't be said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Hound

This is the world that b-dolo wants to live in

World marks 30 years since Tiananmen massacre as China censors all mention

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/06/03/a...ntl/index.html

---

That is a government banning media. I am advocating that private business has rights to do want they want. There is no comparison. I believe in free market system which does not allow government interference in business. So how you draw that conclusion? or comparison?

Your boomer takes are annoying, companies can't just do whatever they want (even though most do but that's what kickbacks are for) that's why we have laws and regulations are for.

A private company can't enforce all women within the company to strip naked and start fondling seedy old men lol I'm not sure how you've come to the conclusion that just because twitter and facebook exist they can do whatever they like and especially so when they are shaping the narrative of the news worldwide.

How did this tech companies get their power? The market gave them the capital. They picked them over other competiton. So who decideds what get published on their platform? The market, if they dont agree they can go somewhere else. A private company has the right to make decisions that effect their profitability. If that means banning somebody to not lose advertisng dollars, that is within their rights. Your comparsion to making women commit sexual acts does even fit the comtext of what is being discussed.

Its funny how all these politicians bitching about social media had no problems spending millions of dollars on it this past election. This isn't about censorship