YT is gone too. But WE'RE the nazi fascists.
Could this actually be good for him? I think he already has his own website where he can post his content.
Now folks on CNN and other media are talking about him, giving him publicity.
YT is gone too. But WE'RE the nazi fascists.
Could this actually be good for him? I think he already has his own website where he can post his content.
Now folks on CNN and other media are talking about him, giving him publicity.
Chris Murphy said:Infowars is the tip of a giant iceberg of hate and lies that uses sites like Facebook and YouTube to tear our nation apart. These companies must do more than take down one website. The survival of our democracy depends on it.
Mark Kern said:Alex Jones is a test.
If they get to do this to Alex, unimpeded, they will starting hitting much more moderate targets.
Pick the flamboyant obvious one 1st. Then go from there.
The tactic, and timing pior to Midterms, is blatantly obvious to anyone who cares to lift the fold.
I think Alex is in a good position to spearhead a lawsuit and spur congressional inquiry. We should support those efforts even if we find him objectionable.
Continue to talk loudly about it on social media, and do our best to bring it to the attention of this Administration.
"First they came for the [STRIKE]Socialists[/STRIKE] [conspiracy theorists], and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a [STRIKE]Socialist[/STRIKE] [conspiracy theorist]."
Like running plays in football. They won't stop unless you make them stop, because it gets the job done
As long as the targets are strictly from the right half of the spectrum, I predict the progressives will be cheering them on
Originally Posted by Mark KernAlex Jones is a test.
If they get to do this to Alex, unimpeded, they will starting hitting much more moderate targets.
Pick the flamboyant obvious one 1st. Then go from there.
The tactic, and timing pior to Midterms, is blatantly obvious to anyone who cares to lift the fold.
I think Alex is in a good position to spearhead a lawsuit and spur congressional inquiry. We should support those efforts even if we find him objectionable.
Continue to talk loudly about it on social media, and do our best to bring it to the attention of this Administration.
We didn’t suspend Alex Jones or Infowars yesterday. We know that’s hard for many but the reason is simple: he hasn’t violated our rules. We’ll enforce if he does. And we’ll continue to promote a healthy conversational environment by ensuring tweets aren’t artificially amplified. Truth is we’ve been terrible at explaining our decisions in the past. We’re fixing that. We’re going to hold Jones to the same standard we hold to every account, not taking one-off actions to make us feel good in the short term, and adding fuel to new conspiracy theories. If we succumb and simply react to outside pressure, rather than straightforward principles we enforce (and evolve) impartially regardless of political viewpoints, we become a service that’s constructed by our personal views that can swing in any direction. That’s not us. Accounts like Jones' can often sensationalize issues and spread unsubstantiated rumors, so it’s critical journalists document, validate, and refute such information directly so people can form their own opinions. This is what serves the public conversation best.
Twitter is planning to accelerate a crackdown on “hate speech” and is looking to evaluate whether to punish users for “off-platform behavior,” according to a company-wide email sent on Wednesday
So what's everyone's proverbial hill with regards to 1A?
Even with regards to detestable people.
Removal from social networks is pretty tame.
Removal of web hosting for your site... Meh, that's happened.
Removal of content from platforms (YouTube, Vimeo)... that's done.
Not allowed to speak at public venues, universities, schools...
Removal from the Internet. Oh now it gets interesting... Your ISP no longer wants to do business with you? That's probably one that would be overturned with argument.
Maybe cell provider refusing to do business with you... or banks...
Would have to be a pretty awful person for that, I'd imagine... for companies and services to feel so empowered by the court of public opinion that they could do that and think they wouldn't get away with it.
I'm sure such a person will come along eventually, and we'll be tested.
I do not see anything that you mentioned as pertaining to the 1A.
Private owners do not have to put up with anything they do not like.
Many do for business reasons. If they can make a profit it is good for them.
If they want to virtue signal and are willing to lose whatever profit they do that is their prerogative.
Do I like it no, I do not care for Mr. Jones. I have probably listened to a total of 2 minutes of his content in 5 - 10 second bites.
I understand that you said the thread would be open to non governmental suppression of speech, but I see no legal recourse for that.
The only way would be to sway public opinion and currently the din of the minority leftists is all that is being taken into account.
With respect specifically to banks (and insurance companies) isn't this already being done to the NRA and gun manufacturers? Not to mention targeting by the NY governor and AG. "Protected speech" is arguably only about 1/3 of what the 1A covers but so many people act like its the most important part
This one would qualify. At least where those entities were public.I do not see anything that you mentioned as pertaining to the 1A.
Private owners do not have to put up with anything they do not like.
Many do for business reasons. If they can make a profit it is good for them.
If they want to virtue signal and are willing to lose whatever profit they do that is their prerogative.
Do I like it no, I do not care for Mr. Jones. I have probably listened to a total of 2 minutes of his content in 5 - 10 second bites.
I understand that you said the thread would be open to non governmental suppression of speech, but I see no legal recourse for that.
The only way would be to sway public opinion and currently the din of the minority leftists is all that is being taken into account.
Not allowed to speak at public venues, universities, schools...