A
anon_ph7vrsh7abnty
Guest
If Facebook (or any other publisher) limits the information they broadcast with any bias, aren't they also a fake news source?
Twitter, FB mass (fake news) purge is gearing up.
- Thread starter MegaPoke
- Start date
Wrong. You aren't this simple. The notion that the MSM is THE credible source of factual information has been proven a laughable concept. Those who want to censor the internet want to do so because they haven't been able to control the narrative.
It's this line of thinking that lost Hillary the election and will continue to be the demise of liberals/Dems. At some point you all will realize the wizard behind the curtain has been exposed.
The distinction is that the "MSM" (I prefer "corporate media" is selective and slanted. WHOEVER presents information for a living will never report what we all want or with the perspective we all want. I get that. What I don't get is defending whole cloth fabrication. And it's the right doing it.
Well first what do you mean by "limit." What's that look like? I just saw a deal in tv that said the way they do it is by prohibiting ad revenue from those click bait sites that have phony headlines.
I'm not personally concerned with bias. I'm concerned with outright stating facts that aren't true. There's ALWAYS bias in media, there's no way around it and that's not entirely bad.
The issue is who is to be the arbiter of what is real and fake?
Why are liberals and Dems afraid of a wide open internet? People should have completely free speech on any forum. If someone feels it's fake or false they have the right to point it out or provide an opposing point of few.
Giving control to liberal globalists will never fly with conservatives or libertarian minded people.
Just spit balling here but what if the Trump administration decided that Twitter was indeed a utility? Could it be subject to enforcement of fair and consistent moderation?
I mean Twitter has claimed itself as a utility and more people get their news from there than cable tv now. Why not make it so?
I mean Twitter has claimed itself as a utility and more people get their news from there than cable tv now. Why not make it so?
Such as? Negative stories about the Clintons? Negative stories about Obama?
I guess you're comfortable thinking that all of the labeling, being done by the left and carried in the corporate media echo chamber, is based on fact?
Instead of #netneutrality it will be #fbneutrality and @twitterneutrality
You truly have no on idea.... these are for profit corporations. The job is return on equity. Your bitch is against the market, not some backroom liberal Cabal ...
I'm against government involvement of any sort toward social media, media, etc.
We call it market economics. Vote with your eyeballs if you don't like Facebook or Twitters business practices.
This whining about products offered from private companies, shockingly out of character for this board....
The pattern that's developing is that the board is pro- speech when it is consistent with their opinions and anti-speech when not.
A "wide open" internet means the website owner can choose what's on their site, doesn't it?
I agree.
I said earlier that if the social media companies want to commit suicide and piss off half their potential users then fine by me. I believe people would migrate to an alternative that didn't denigrate or censor their users content.
The issue you are not addressing is this new liberal talking point that has popped everywhere about "fake news" and wanting governments to regulate it. That is something I think should be opposed by all free minded people
Maybe I should type this slow so you will understand.
Individual websites can do what they want, free enterprise. What we are opposed to is a government body or multiple governments deciding what can and cannot be on the net.
I thought that's what was being stated the whole time. Then pilt made me think I'd read too fast because I'm really only skimming.
Oh. Thank you for explaining that. Is there a movement underway for government to censor Twitter?
No maroon, there is a movement underway for some governmental or UN sponsored entity to control/censor THE ENTIRE INTERNET.
Obama and Merkel expressed this desire openly at their recent meeting.
Uh, no. I guess you missed the election coverage this year?
Yes, the corporate media is for profit, as is just about every other media outlet. But it sure is a liberal Cabal, no longer even backroom. Even strong denial doesn't change the truth that was laid bare this year.
Because of the obvious, the "alt-right" sources flourished. Now, because of the other obvious, the corporate media is awash in a very strong interest to suppress the "alt-right" sources any way they can. I care not even a little because it's already established and doesn't require the vehicles of Facebook and Twitter any longer. And it's clear the elected liberal types would love to find a way to suppress the "alt-right" too.
As this election showed, the big money and the big media aren't the only game in town. As I said previously, I want the liberal establishment to continue to think they chased a rabbit down the hole. Watching the liberal establish burn down might be more entertaining than watching the Republicans shit show. And that just might return Democrats back to reality.
I'd like to see a link. I just googled it and nothing came up that reflects what you wrote. Are you referring to net neutrality?
Your Google must be broken. I googled Obama and Merkel's comments on the internet and got lots of content.
From one of your news sources.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/18/world/europe/obama-angela-merkel-donald-trump.html?_r=0
From two fake news sites.
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/11/17/merkel-obama-internet-disruptive-force/
http://www.independentsentinel.com/...bout-censoring-right-wingers-on-the-internet/
From one of your news sources.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/18/world/europe/obama-angela-merkel-donald-trump.html?_r=0
From two fake news sites.
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/11/17/merkel-obama-internet-disruptive-force/
http://www.independentsentinel.com/...bout-censoring-right-wingers-on-the-internet/
Last edited:
Hilarious and sad statement of the lack of understanding of how the interweb works... carry on with your nutty conspiracy theory....
Busy week, must have missed the calls for government regulation of news... Can you share a credible source?
You lefties sure can be obtuse, there are three articles listed above but if you google "fake news" you'll get plenty of source material.
1. I read those articles and don't see a call for censorship. Setting aside the spin and commentary, where are they calling for censorship? FWIW I agree gubmint shouldn't censor political speech for several reasons.
2. Didn't Trump say something to the effect he wanted to change libel laws? I don't remember any critical threads then. You are so untethered to any objective administration of government. What does the guy have to do for you people to walk away from his crazy shit? He's already wiping his ass with conflicts of interest. He could steal from the government on national tv and I think you people would yawn and ask if he's cut Medicare yet.
Sorry, looking for someone asking for govt regulation... not seen ANYTHING even remotely close to that except here...
Let's not forget this...
https://www.cnet.com/news/us-intern...-internet-corporation-assigned-names-numbers/
https://www.cnet.com/news/us-intern...-internet-corporation-assigned-names-numbers/
A
anon_ph7vrsh7abnty
Guest
How about this?
FB and Twitter can deny conservative ideology and conservative private businesses can deny liberal ideas that are contrary to their doctrines.
Good?
FB and Twitter can deny conservative ideology and conservative private businesses can deny liberal ideas that are contrary to their doctrines.
Good?
David is right about the ads, I was involved on the meta side, but he's skating on the vested interest.
Tech has been running a train on the middle class like no other sector save banking.
Tech has been running a train on the middle class like no other sector save banking.
What I am looking for is "this new liberal talking point that has popped everywhere about "fake news" and wanting governments to regulate it" - no amount of search engining has produced anything even remotely like this. Curious where you are seeing it.... Got anything you can share?
https://gab.ai/auth/loginThe story floated recently is that social media giants need to tighten up the news circulated and filter out the 'fake news' elements - which you would assume are the stupid click bait "stories" with ridiculous or misleading headlines.
Well, it's about more than that. It's about silencing the so called alt-right, which destroyed the MSM in this last election cycle.
Breitbart, The Blaze and InfoWars are on the list of fake news sources being published - along with The Onion and other satire sites. Slanted? Obviously, but there is no mention of Huffington Post, Mother Jones or Slate or any of a dozen other such often cited liberal news and analysis sources.
And right on time, Paul Joseph Watson has another brilliant video addressing this nonsense.
