• 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!

YouTube, Apple and Facebook remove content from InfoWars and Alex Jones

Phys251 said:
Still waiting on you to tell me what my position is. And it's becoming clear that I'm unlikely to get a straight answer from you on that question.
Click to expand...

i have already posted your positions twice, so if you wish to keep on playing your little game of trying to get out of what you posted,.....keep going.

maybe next time you will think before you post silliness
 
Master PO said:
i have already posted your positions twice, so if you wish to keep on playing your little game of trying to get out of what you posted,.....keep going.

maybe next time you will think before you post silliness
Click to expand...

He said legal effort, which inherently complies with the first amendment. (because if it breaks the first amendment, it's illegal) Your interpretation is silliness.
 
Misleading thread title: "Media Giants Shut Down Infowars"

No, Infowars still exists. Media giants did not shut it down.
 
MovingPictures said:
Conservatives would rather mindlessly cite an amendment they don't understand, than to practice some of that personal responsibility they preach.

If Jones hadn't kept posting videos of him openly harassing people, he'd still be allowed on YT to be his stupid old self.
Click to expand...

It's as if some people STILL require the following reminder (Master, if you can see this, this is a hint to you as well):

free_speech.webp
 
Deuce said:
He said legal effort, which inherently complies with the first amendment. (because if it breaks the first amendment, it's illegal) Your interpretation is silliness.
Click to expand...

you riding in on a white horse will not save her

legal means law, and she was clear she's wants legal ability to shut speech down, and then preach law of the 1st to say we have free speech.......better go and feed your horse
 
marke said:
American leftist barbarians come from a long line of intolerant savages throughout history who do everything they can to shut down the dissemination of truth.
Click to expand...

So, you're saying the water really is turning the friggin frogs gay?
 
Master PO said:
i have already posted your positions twice, so if you wish to keep on playing your little game of trying to get out of what you posted,.....keep going.

maybe next time you will think before you post silliness
Click to expand...

Master, when you're ready to get serious and start learning what my position actually is on the freedom of the press, not the phantom position that apparently exists solely in your own mind, feel free to use your First Amendment rights to let me know. ;)
 
Deuce said:
So content creators have free speech rights that mean all content platforms, regardless of type, must host literally anyone who demands it. Youtube must host pornography, or else free speech is doomed.

Facebook and Youtube create their own content too. Why don't you give a **** about their rights?
Click to expand...

What does Facebook's or YouTube's content have to do with the topic? Probably about the same as porn - nothing.
 
Lutherf said:
There is a certain irony with social media sites using their first amendment right to deny someone else their first amendment rights.

The ideological divide in America continues to grow in unhealthy ways.
Click to expand...


No one's first amendment rights were denied. No one has a first amendment to post material on a privately owned venue.



When DP blocks neo-nazi content, it is not violating anyone's first amendment rights. If the government shuts down Infowars, then we're talking first amendment. But neither the government nor the so-called media giants have shut down Infowars.

Let me know when this site goes dark:

https://www.infowars.com/
 
Moon said:
What does Facebook's or YouTube's content have to do with the topic? Probably about the same as porn - nothing.
Click to expand...

They are content creators and therefore control what broadcasts just like Fox News, right?

The porn is a separate point. If Facebook can't remove Alex Jones, they can't remove porn. Agree or disagree?
 
Media Giants Shut Down Infowars
Click to expand...

good. he doesn't have a constitutional right to use their platforms any more than someone has a constitutional right to be able to post on a privately owned message board. **** him and his sick Sandy Hook CT.
 
Phys251 said:
Master, when you're ready to get serious and start learning what my position actually is on the freedom of the press, not the phantom position that apparently exists solely in your own mind, feel free to use your First Amendment rights to let me know. ;)
Click to expand...

i know what you said, and it is to use the power of law to shut down any speech your deem offensive to your position, while claiming the 1st is freedom.

news for you and some others here:

freedom of speech is speech you disagree with, if we all agreed on what each one of us says, we would not need freedom of speech!
 
Deuce said:
So, you're saying the water really is turning the friggin frogs gay?
Click to expand...

Should any or all media outlets be closely regulated and forced to meet the political biases of the owners? Should biased regulators be able to expunge whatever materials from broadcast outlets that they do not personally like? Sort of like Russian management of single source propagandist government owned news outlets?
 
Lord of Planar said:
Interesting, the way they treat free speech.
Click to expand...

Ahhh some of we have covered this before. Many corporations can limit speech of their employees. Many private companies can limit speech on their property. If someone is causing harm, spreading insane lies, slandering people, their access to media outlets can be curtailed. Heck in here your freedom of speech has limits, but here you are...

I'd opine we have freedom of reasoned speech, the disagreement maybe on what we all think is reasoned... :peace
 
Phys251 said:
Good. Propaganda is the greatest evil in our society and we need every legal effort possible to shut it down.
Click to expand...

Almost everything comes down to some form of propaganda or another. I don't think we can legally "silence" propaganda. What we need, instead of big brother watching over everything we say, determining if it is "propaganda" or not, and shutting it down accordingly, is to be able, as a people, to act rationally and intelligently. Reason and intelligence are necessary for keeping a Democratic Republic. You cannot shut down everything, instead we need to, we have the duty to, consume and digest information with enough skepticism, reason, and logic to enable ourselves to interact intelligently within the system.

If we cannot do that, then no amount of law will preserve the Republic.
 
All these people who claim that this is a First Amendment issue ...

I wonder how they would feel about Barack Obama standing on their front porch and pontificating about climate change. If you kick him off your porch, are you violating the First Amendment?


Hint: no
 
Deuce said:
They are content creators and therefore control what broadcasts just like Fox News, right?

The porn is a separate point. If Facebook can't remove Alex Jones, they can't remove porn. Agree or disagree?
Click to expand...
Are you mentally incapable of sticking with the topic?
 
Ikari said:
Almost everything comes down to some form of propaganda or another. I don't think we can legally "silence" propaganda. What we need, instead of big brother watching over everything we say, determining if it is "propaganda" or not, and shutting it down accordingly, is to be able, as a people, to act rationally and intelligently. Reason and intelligence are necessary for keeping a Democratic Republic. You cannot shut down everything, instead we need to, we have the duty to, consume and digest information with enough skepticism, reason, and logic to enable ourselves to interact intelligently within the system.

If we cannot do that, then no amount of law will preserve the Republic.
Click to expand...
bingo!
 
marke said:
Should any or all media outlets be closely regulated and forced to meet the political biases of the owners? Should biased regulators be able to expunge whatever materials from broadcast outlets that they do not personally like? Sort of like Russian management of single source propagandist government owned news outlets?
Click to expand...

"Forced to meet the political biases of the owners" doesn't make any sense. They own the company. The company is doing what they want it to do. Facebook isn't being forced to dump Alex Jones, this is what Facebook chose to do.

Are you demanding the government step in and force a private business to host any and all content against their will?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom