Republicans cannot just "use other platforms" because of the network effect. Everyone is already on Facebook, Twitter, et. al. So say die-hard Republicans all go to Parler. Now they're in a bubble. Who are they convincing in the long-term debate that is public discourse? Everyone on Parler a...
So, just because you are at risk of not being seen, because of network effect, you should be allowed to post just any random sh**, far beyond what would get other users banned on FB? How about just not posting random sh**? Like hydro claims, from Trump, that resulted in npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/03/24/820512107/….
@ItalianPhilosophers4Monica I am pointing out the double-standard. If democrats are allowed to say inane BS like having a ceremony on august 8th is a nazi dogwhistle because 8/8 is nazi code, why not? bizpacreview.com/2019/08/07/…
that's not quite the same influence and you know it. i'd never heard of this bizarre claim, wont bother to figure out its inane logic. what a POTUS says on health has consequences and so did his constant Chinese-baiting that now resulted in the need for campaigns like StopAsianHate.
> that platform just gets attacked/destroyed by allies of Facebook/Twitter/Youtube This feels very conspiricy-theory-esque. It's bad press to be supporting hate speach / nazis / dangerous content, so other companies don't want to. There isn't some grand conspiracy by big tech to take down conservative platforms. It's just that when a website is full of nazis, nobody wants to be seen as associated with it.
@Ryan_L You know, I generally agree that it access is necessary to the Republicans so I've upvoted. I disagree that the allies of FB are driving Gab censorship though - there is just a lot of bad publicity to be had from hosting extreme right views. For example, on Risky Business, a security podcast, the host would regularly rip into Cloudfare for hosting 8chan. 8chan had some linkage to the El Paso shooting, so Cloudfare finally booted them.
And, well, Trump's ban only happened because he regularly spouted drivel, I'm 200% sure FB would rather make money and abuse their users in peace, without monopoly talk being on the table. Neither Twitter nor FB wants to ban Trump, he just broke too many rules, too frequently and neither is obligated to keep him on. And, btw, I've largely given up on CNN/MSNBC coverage, as they like to spin things too much. Not as much as Fox does, but way too much regardless.
@ItalianPhilosophers4Monica This was a problem well before Trump. Yes, the el Paso shooter used 8chan, and nearly every other shooter has had a Facebook account. That is the double standard. 8chan is small enough for cloudflare to not mind dropping them. But nobody would ever drop Facebook. FB has even gotten governments to cave to them. abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/… I don't watch Fox either. Their local affiliates can be ok, but I don't really trust any national news sources. I look for primary docs.
oh, and dunno if you care care, but that bizpac review you link to is iffy on facts and hard right according to mediabiasfactcheck I'd have equivalent distrust of someone quoting Huffpost articles.
@ItalianPhilosophers4Monica I didn't read it, I only wanted it for the headline. Just google MSNBC flag half mast, you can find a bunch of other sites talking about it.
This seems to be about Republicans being banned from FaceBook, except they're not. Mitch McConnell has a page. Big Trump-backer Marjorie Taylor-Greene has a page. Matt Gaetz, -- the congressman with the sex-trafficing scandal -- has a page. Only Trump was banned, for inciting violence.
@Ryan_L "constant chinese hate" saying that a virus originated from where it originated isn't hate anymore than when we talk about the Spanish Flu or MERS (Middle Eastern Raspatory Syndrome). Especially now that more evidence is coming out that corroborates statements that it originated there. It was fine when CNN called it the Wuhan Virus... but it's "asian hate" when Trump does it? When everything is racist, nothing is. realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/03/12/…
The whole point behind the public square is that there is only one. In that case, why would breaking up Facebook to create two public squares be a good idea?
@Caleth lol if it's China's fault, then implying it's china's fault is simply stating facts. A country isn't a race and blaming a country isn't hating the race. The reason calling it The China Virus is "Bad" isn't because calling it the China Virus is bad... otherwise, people would have been mad about that in December 2019. The reason it's bad is because Trump did it. Otherwise, the people mad wouldn't have called it that themselves for months beforehand. Orange Man Bad syndrome: Perfectly acceptable until Trump did it.
@PaulJohnson where is it listed anywhere that there must be a "single" public square? That would imply we need to combine Twitter and Facebook into one since right now we currently have two "public squares"? Uh oh... we can't have two! and splitting Facebook doesn't mean that THAT part gets split... could split the ad business from Facebook or any number of pulling apart the business options that's isn't making two front ends...
@WernerCD people were upset by the descriptor "China Virus" in late 2019/early 2020. That's why many outlets changed how they referred to it around then. Trump doubled-down on being insensitive, going from "that's maybe problematic" to "that's definitely hateful"
@WernerCD where is it listed anywhere that there must be a "single" public square? You did, in your first paragraph. I even quoted you to highlight the fact. Do you read what you wrote?
@PaulJohnson I've never implied that there must be one... especially since there's already multiple: Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc.
@Caleth People are okay with Spanish Flu and MERS and hundreds of other descriptions that simply state where it originated. As has been used to describe these things for... well... almost all of human history. YOU being upset about a name doesn't mean the name is bad... it just means you're easily upset (not that it's YOU in particular). Lets be honest... people didn't get mad about it until Orange Man said it. IE: It was repeated consistently for MONTHS without issue on, say, CNN until Trump said the same thing. And now, more evidence is coming forward on it's origination in labs there...
@WernerCD I'm not upset by it. And there are degrees of insensitivity. One could say "I'd prefer if you used the term 1918 Flu, please", and not be judging you irredeemable.
@Caleth I did say "not YOU in particular" as that I'm not talking about you you. My point is that if someone is offended by something doesn't mean its offensive - people today are offended by lots of stuff that isn't offensive simply because of who says it. So much of, for example in the topic at hand, what Trump says is the same stuff other people say. IE: Wuhan Virus or Kung Flu. Its not offensive until Trump does it. Or, say, the OK hand signal. Or so many examples. Listing the place of origin isn't racism and has never been so... until Orange Man did it.
@WernerCD you are labouring under the misapprehension that there is some objective standard "offensive". There isn't. There's just things that people are offended by. And you are ignoring matters of degree. "Wuhan Virus" is mildly offensive. "Kung Flu" is more offensive. And it's not that the OK symbol is offensive, but that racists using the OK symbol to identify themselves to other racists means that fewer people are using it for it's original meaning
@Caleth labeling things offensive - IE Okay Symbol - doesn't make them racist. Just like the number 3 from a Jepordy contestant who also did a 1 and 2 isn't offensive. "There's just some things people are offended by" and there are some people who get offended by everything and seem to the think the world operates based on their bad attituded. Likewise, there are those who take what everyone is doing and label offensive when specific people do it. IE: OMB people labling Wuhan Virus offensive AFTER Trump says it. And after all of this... hating China still isn't "racism" and never has been.
@WernerCD did you read what I wrote? The OK symbol isn't offensive per se. People are upset because it's been hijacked as a way of identifying as a racist.
@Caleth it's been "hijacked" by trolls in 4chan that love watching offended people get offended by being offended. Them being upset is exactly my point... people today get upset over OK (Trolls: bbc.com/news/world-europe-48293817 "Internet trolls turned trendsetters") and sandwiches (huffpost.com/entry/is-peanut-butter-and-jelly-racist_n_1874905). People get offended because that's their way of making noise and gaining power. Why are they offensive? not because they are ACTUALLY offensive... but because weak minded people need to cry over SOMETHING even if it's madeup.
@WernerCD no, it was hijacked by white supremacists after trolls on 4chan gave them plausible deniability over it. It's becoming a white supremacist symbol because white supremacists are using it as a symbol.
@Caleth it wasn't a "symbol" until 4chan trolls made it one for people to get offended by... and then they laughed as idiots took the bait and cried like bleating sheep. "White supremacists" are the boogeyman of 2021... no one really has any nearby but we have to say 3 Hail AOCs and Praise Bidens to protect from those evil white people. Woke Religion DEMANDS it. When everything is "white supremacists" fault, nothing is... when everything is racist, nothing is. When everything is offensive, nothing is.
@WernerCD Someone who shoots up a mosque isn't a white supremacist? Someone who's political platform is "France is for white people" isn't a white supremacist?
@WernerCD After MERS and SARS, health agencies recommended region-based desease names be dropped. From experience they found it makes them more difficult to treat since people get the false idea that [race X] is more likely to get and spread it and [not race X] is safe. We also noticed people of [race X] were getting beaten up out of fear. When COVID struck (notice how there's no region name in it, on purpose) Dr. Fauci would have explained this to the President.
Discussion on answer by Ryan_L: Why d…
Discussion on answer by Ryan_L: Why d…