• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump whines about social media[W:78]

Re: Trump whines about social media

I never said easily. I said the best way.

Does not counter emotional conditioning.

Logic and reason are not involved in the process. It bypasses them.

They do not try to convince you with facts when it is easier to make you feel one way or the other about a subject.

That is what persuasion science practioners sell.

The predictable, repeatable emotional response to the subject at hand in a predictable percentage of the target demographic.
 
Re: Trump whines about social media

How the **** is speech tyranny? Shutting out views you don't like is tyranny. Allowing even unpopular speech is the opposite.

The government allows "unpopular" speech as it should.

Private entities don't have to and in fact have a duty (IMO) to their audience to "censor" some views. I recently visited the Smithsonian natural history museum. They don't allow the "unpopular" viewpoint that the earth is 10,000 years old and that man rode around on dinosaurs. That's a good thing! There is no obligation on the part of museum staff to present, then try to debunk theories contradicted by all of the sciences. Doing so would be a disservice to the public by lending legitimacy to views that have no basis in science.

But if you want to see/read that nonsense, you can find all kinds of 'creationist' websites out there to suit your fancy. There are conferences, etc. you may attend, and government does not shut them down. That's freedom. What's not "freedom" is the idea that the Smithsonian must allow all views to be presented. If you teach your kids young-earth creationist origin theory, don't go to the Smithsonian museums! Or start your own young-earth museum. There's one up the road from me in KY!
 
Re: Trump whines about social media

The government allows "unpopular" speech as it should.

Private entities don't have to and in fact have a duty (IMO) to their audience to "censor" some views. I recently visited the Smithsonian natural history museum. They don't allow the "unpopular" viewpoint that the earth is 10,000 years old and that man rode around on dinosaurs. That's a good thing! There is no obligation on the part of museum staff to present, then try to debunk theories contradicted by all of the sciences. Doing so would be a disservice to the public by lending legitimacy to views that have no basis in science.

But if you want to see/read that nonsense, you can find all kinds of 'creationist' websites out there to suit your fancy. There are conferences, etc. you may attend, and government does not shut them down. That's freedom. What's not "freedom" is the idea that the Smithsonian must allow all views to be presented. If you teach your kids young-earth creationist origin theory, don't go to the Smithsonian museums! Or start your own young-earth museum. There's one up the road from me in KY!
Are you seriously equating creationism in museums to political speech?

Jasper, c'mon. That's weak as hell.

Sent from my SM-S727VL using Tapatalk
 
Re: Trump whines about social media

Does not counter emotional conditioning.

Logic and reason are not involved in the process. It bypasses them.

They do not try to convince you with facts when it is easier to make you feel one way or the other about a subject.

That is what persuasion science practioners sell.

The predictable, repeatable emotional response to the subject at hand in a predictable percentage of the target demographic.
It's pretty hard to condition someone emotionally with speech that is optional for them to even listen to. You are buying into a sheeple argument.

Sent from my SM-S727VL using Tapatalk
 
Re: Trump whines about social media

OK, I don't agree, but you have a good option available - don't use Twitter. That's how it works. No one's free speech rights are being infringed here. If you want an uncensored cesspool but with unlimited "free speech", go over to Gab. You'll see quickly why social media platforms ban people.
I see you are dodging the dishonest behavior and public announcements by Twitter about their political nuetrality. They made assurances to get traffic and violated those assurances.

Sent from my SM-S727VL using Tapatalk
 
Re: Trump whines about social media

Are you seriously equating creationism in museums to political speech?

Jasper, c'mon. That's weak as hell.

I'm pointing out the hole in your argument about principles and speech. Young earth creationism is "unpopular" in science circles. Why shouldn't the Smithsonian have an ethical obligation to allow such "unpopular" speech at the natural history museum? About 40% of the country believes in some form of creationism.

The point is there is NOTHING inherently wrong with private entities "censoring" speech, political or otherwise. If you don't like how Twitter is operating their website, that's fine - go over to Gab and see an uncensored cesspool if you like that better. I've been over there. It looks like a playground for morons to me. Twitter has ZERO obligation to allow its site to become like that.
 
Re: Trump whines about social media

I see you are dodging the dishonest behavior and public announcements by Twitter about their political nuetrality. They made assurances to get traffic and violated those assurances.

I've seen no actual evidence of that, and I'm on Twitter quite a bit. Lots of conservatives on the site - I follow a bunch of them, and their tweets come through my feed just fine. They're admittedly an unfriendly place for white supremacists or white nationalists, and I'm OK with that.

What you have is a business with human beings operating it. They're fallible and biased and make mistakes. OK. But even if the site is inherently biased it's still not a free speech issue, which is what your argument has been. Don't like it, don't use it. That's the actual conservative argument here, unless you think government should intervene to force Twitter to something like the Fairness Doctrine, rejected years ago by conservatives.
 
Back
Top Bottom