You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Politically motivated internet censorship
March 29 2024 1.13am

Politically motivated internet censorship

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 > Last >>

 

View davenotamonkey's Profile davenotamonkey Flag 11 Aug 17 9.20am Send a Private Message to davenotamonkey Add davenotamonkey as a friend

Very much in-line with the recent "Google Manifesto" and the sacking of an employee for wrong-think, the big-hitters in social media have been heavily clamping down on those it disagrees with.

This now comes in the form of Twitter suspensions, Facebook bans and de-monetisation of YouTube videos. The level at which this is occurring has stepped up. This well put together video (approx 10m) captures the state of play a year ago - things have accelerated since then:

[Link]

Once again, Sargon of Akkad (https://twitter.com/Sargon_of_Akkad) has been suspended by Twitter. Lauren Southern had her Patreon account shut down. Ladies Diamond and Silk(https://twitter.com/DiamondandSilk/status/895693343522398208) have had their YouTube videos de-monetised, seemingly because they support POTUS (indeed, they are one of the 45 accounts Donald Trump follows on Twitter).

These are just a small drop in the ocean - there are hundreds more examples, and with very little opportunity to appeal. The same is just not happening on the other side of the political spectrum, with many examples of more extreme views being entirely green-lit.

These platforms are becoming ideologically dangerous safe-space echo chambers. Where there is no dissenting viewpoint, you do not grow as a society. You stagnate.

Frankly, it is becoming frighteningly Orwellian, as Google has aptly demonstrated. These companies, however, are merely doing the bidding of a political agenda that (IMHO) is losing the argument, and now must resort to stifling the argument.

Whatever your viewpoint, the exchange of viewpoints should be facilitated by these platforms, not controlled by them.

I would ask that, if you choose to comment here, you first watch the above video, and also please keep on-topic.

Edited by davenotamonkey (11 Aug 2017 9.20am)

Edited by davenotamonkey (11 Aug 2017 9.30am)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 11 Aug 17 9.27am Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Winter is coming.

Rarely disagree with Sargon.

Edited by Stirlingsays (11 Aug 2017 9.28am)

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Kermit8's Profile Kermit8 Flag Hevon 11 Aug 17 10.11am Send a Private Message to Kermit8 Add Kermit8 as a friend

Reminds me of the old days with Thatcher's cabinet. If you disagreed with her you were out. And does Leave's total disregarding of the truth about that £350mill count as censorship?

 


Big chest and massive boobs

[Link]


Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View davenotamonkey's Profile davenotamonkey Flag 11 Aug 17 10.28am Send a Private Message to davenotamonkey Add davenotamonkey as a friend

Originally posted by Kermit8

Reminds me of the old days with Thatcher's cabinet. If you disagreed with her you were out. And does Leave's total disregarding of the truth about that £350mill count as censorship?

Only if you don't understand what the word "censorship" means.

And only if you think a "serving suggestion" on the side of a tin of tuna is a legal directive to consume tuna in that way, and absolutely no other.

Glad you brought Thatcher into it though. Thoroughly relevant to the topic on-hand.

Yeah, you're on top form this morning Kermit.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 11 Aug 17 10.46am

Problem you have here is that these are private companies and social media is not protected as free speech, as the forum they provide for communication is a private one, to which users subscribe.

Now I'm not going to defend people closeing down free speech, because that's wrong. There is nothing wrong with being a Trump Supporter, a Flat Earther, Conspiracy Theoriest of 9/11 - but some times people do stray into (and I'm being generous) areas which really are about infringing on other peoples rights, especially minority groups, that really tend to be 'agenda driven' such as holocaust denial, anti-gay rights that border on being highly inflammatory and deliberately insulting to other users of that social media - and that I don't have a problem with it being shut down - Because its outside of the terms of agreement that the user signed up to.

Problem is that a lot of those being shut down also have a tendency to attack other users as well, which creates a problem if you're a moderator. Who do you represent, the rights of an individual that are not applicable, or your general user base which are applicable under the terms of agreement.

But and here's the but, if people are staying within the terms of agreement, or their employee contract, then they should not face disciplinary proceedings or censorship.

Also I think that when people say they're losing the argument, they're tending to miss the point that a lot of these people aren't engaging in debate but oratory and rhetoric - not engagement.

Edited by jamiemartin721 (11 Aug 2017 10.48am)

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 11 Aug 17 10.52am Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by Kermit8

Reminds me of the old days with Thatcher's cabinet. If you disagreed with her you were out. And does Leave's total disregarding of the truth about that £350mill count as censorship?

What a ridiculous comparison.

And no silly billy, lying does not count as censorship.....Kermy I do like you on here....but sometimes..really... If your brains cells were pound coins you wouldn't have enough to pay your rent.

Edited by Stirlingsays (11 Aug 2017 10.52am)

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 11 Aug 17 10.58am Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

I don't really agree much with Jamie on this....we can talk about 'private companies'...but we can also talk about practical 'monopolies'.

At the end of the day censorship, outside of dictatorships, never wins. Alternatives spring up and I'm eager for that 'Youtube killer'.

I've already started using 'Minds' a lot....I'm eager for more platforms that haven't been infected with the kind of censorship these insidious 'wrong-think' guardians want to impose on us.

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
nickgusset Flag Shizzlehurst 11 Aug 17 10.59am

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

What a ridiculous comparison.

And no silly billy, lying does not count as censorship.....Kermy I do like you on here....but sometimes..really... If your brains cells were pound coins you wouldn't have enough to pay your rent.

Edited by Stirlingsays (11 Aug 2017 10.52am)


That's why a vote for Corbyn and rent caps is the way forward.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 11 Aug 17 11.04am Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by nickgusset


That's why a vote for Corbyn and rent caps is the way forward.

Ethically yeah...practically I'm yet to be convinced it works.....maybe it does....maybe it's like the original minimal wage argument and the Tories are wrong.

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 11 Aug 17 11.10am

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

I don't really agree much with Jamie on this....we can talk about 'private companies'...but we can also talk about practical 'monopolies'.

At the end of the day censorship, outside of dictatorships, never wins. Alternatives spring up and I'm eager for that 'Youtube killer'.

I've already started using 'Minds' a lot....I'm eager for more platforms that haven't been infected with the kind of censorship these insidious 'wrong-think' guardians want to impose on us.

I think the correct response would be to extend free speech to protect people from companies. Of course no ones going to do that, because its companies who really run the show - and they won't support something that restricts their ability.

Of course that's what the left has being saying for a long time, that rights don't just need to be protected from the state, the biggest abuser of rights has been companies.

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 11 Aug 17 11.17am

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

What a ridiculous comparison.

And no silly billy, lying does not count as censorship.....Kermy I do like you on here....but sometimes..really... If your brains cells were pound coins you wouldn't have enough to pay your rent.

Edited by Stirlingsays (11 Aug 2017 10.52am)

I think maybe the compromise is that if you can be demonstrated to be lying to an independent body, then you could be banned.

Its hard to sympathise with some of the right wingers on Facebook, because they're so aggressively in your face and distributing of thinly veiled hate.

In truth, I think you should only be censored if your regularly attacking other people, trolling, inconsiderate to other users or committing an act that is criminal, liablous etc.

A cousin of mine, regularly posts all kinds of absurd s**t, including accusing Bill Clinton of being a rapist a murderer, holocaust denial, that anyone who has an abortion is a killer, that trans people are mentally ill and not human as well as occasional right wing arguments that are fairly well formed.

I'm surprised he hasn't been banned truth be told, because in between his decent points, are legally questionable content and statements there is a really scary level of thinly veiled hate.

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 11 Aug 17 11.20am

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

I don't really agree much with Jamie on this....we can talk about 'private companies'...but we can also talk about practical 'monopolies'.

At the end of the day censorship, outside of dictatorships, never wins. Alternatives spring up and I'm eager for that 'Youtube killer'.

I've already started using 'Minds' a lot....I'm eager for more platforms that haven't been infected with the kind of censorship these insidious 'wrong-think' guardians want to impose on us.

I don't think they're wrong-think guardians or pursuing a political agenda so much as they're abusing their power for their own selfish reasons - and that's maybe the concern, its about the power over others, which is where the Orwellian aspect comes in. The danger of Big Brother isn't censorship - Its the abuse of power over others, first their behaviour, then their mind and then their lives.

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 > Last >>

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Politically motivated internet censorship