Welcome to Communist China and our Bug Tech overlords

More of the double standard

From the Washington Post - Facebook’s Sandberg deflects blame for Capitol riot even as new evidence shows Facebook played a pivotal role.

Facebook has been repeatedly proven to be a venue for provoking mass violence and promoting extremism. But it contributes huge amounts of money to the Dem Party, and has massive power over journalists. So they decided to destroy Parler when FB's role was far bigger.

Parler gets shut down by the big tech Oligarchs even though none of the people arrested had Parler accounts and yet Facebook and Twitter are still operating even though they were complicit in the action

And the TDS hate cult cheers Originally Posted by berryberry

Berry, the question was...."Is there anything in the constitution or federal law that prohibits a company from discriminating against another company or person.

I don't know what Parler is, but I'm willing to bet there is/was liberal censorship going on.

Before you respond to the 2nd statement answer the first question.
Oh and dude you need to chill it's not good for your health to get so worked up about some thing you have absolutely no control over

Berry, the question was...."Is there anything in the constitution or federal law that prohibits a company from discriminating against another company or person.

I don't know what Parler is, but I'm willing to bet there is/was liberal censorship going on.

Before you respond to the 2nd statement answer the first question.
Oh and dude you need to chill it's not good for your health to get so worked up about some thing you have absolutely no control over Originally Posted by jmichael

I am perfectly chill, thank you.

And no - the topic was when one side gets to censor speech, you no longer have free speech. When one side gets to be the arbiter of what's news, you no longer have truth. You have only propaganda.

As to your first question, do you believe that a couple unelected oligarchs from a few Big Tech monopolies should have the power on what speech is permitted on the internet? The power on what sites can operate online?

On the second question, Parler was a free speech alternative to Twitter. And nope, your bet would be wrong - no liberal censorship there

They're in a catch 22 so they can't answer the questions.

Hmmmmm - Democrats ordered Silicon Valley monopolies to remove Parler. They obliged. That forced Parler to use a Russian company for hosting.

Now, Dem Rep Maloney wants to investigate Parler for Russia ties. Democrat Maloney is Chair of the powerful House Oversight -- demanding the FBI investigate a US citizen, the founder of Parler, for ties to Russia, citing - among other things - that his wife is Russian.

Xenophobic, McCarthyite madness

They're in a catch 22 so they can't answer the questions. Originally Posted by 1pittsburgh

You have been answered by me twice and others. Are you that retarded or immature? Grow a pair kid

https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/...w/79720017.cms

How many of these powerful people have Chinese partners? Mitch McConnel does, and she's tied to the CCP financially. Same with Zuckerberg.

Soviet party didnt go away in 1992. It just changed tactics.

You have been answered by me twice and others. Are you that retarded or immature? Grow a pair kid Originally Posted by chizzy

No. You replied. You didn't answer the question. Smarten up old man.

No. You replied. You didn't answer the question. Smarten up old man. Originally Posted by 1pittsburgh

Young and dumb..... you arent worth the effort....get ur allowance and buy a brain cell....

YouTube strips rising media company Epoch Times of ability to monetize video content

"This is the latest example of big tech suppression of free speech, a step on the road to communist-style censorship' - publisher Stephen Gregory.

https://justthenews.com/nation/techn...-video-content

Thankfully we have Governors like Ron DeSantis who launched a major push to curb Big Tech’s political bias and censorship today, with measures including a ban on the censorship of political candidates and mandatory opt-outs of content filters for citizens of the Sunshine State.

DeSantis identified Big Tech companies as the leading threat to American democracy and freedom of expression today, and pledged that Florida Republicans would take action.

After being exposed and called out for her huge lie about her "NEAR DEATH EXPERIENCE" on Jan 6, AOC, a Sitting Member of Congress, Weaponizes Her Followers in an Attempt to Silence the Free Press.

The backstory:

According to the mainstream media summation of AOC’s story, AOC claimed she was at the Capitol as armed insurrectionists stormed the halls, those insurrectionists nearly breached her office, and she had to literally run to another building in fear for her life.

The truth is, as journalists have detailed, that AOC was not in the Capitol and hadn’t been there for at least an hour. AOC was in the Cannon House Office Building at the time she was evacuated by a Capitol Police officer who knocked on her door. The Cannon House Office Building is a subterranean walk/train ride from the Capitol and was not in any danger nor did it attract the attention of any protestors.

The censorship request:

When AOC was exposed - AOC sent out an email to her followers claiming that “right-wing operatives” (again, low-key accusing journalists of collusion) “are spreading flat-out lies” and misleading information about her and asking them to report these stories and posts to the social media overlords.

This isn’t a typical call-to-action email from a politician to her supporters. This is a sitting Member of Congress asking her supporters to engage in a targeted harassment campaign aimed at suppressing a free press. She’s not making a law “abridging the freedom…of the press,” but by weaponizing her supporters to attempt to memory hole an unflattering — but true — article by having it scrubbed from what serves as our public square, she’s sure coming close to it.

Well what do you know

A leftist journalist expressed regret about calling for Silicon Valley to censor content after it happened to him. Progressive reporter Jordan Chariton had the change of heart after YouTube took down one of his videos.

Chariton’s original advocacy for censorship occurred when he called for Big Tech giants to target anyone who questioned the legitimacy of the 2020 presidential election.

However, after YouTube pulled video from his own channel for violating the platform’s policies against “spam and deceptive practices,” Chariton reversed his position.

“With time to reflect, & seeing Silicon Valley’s censorship onslaught, I regret this tweet made in [the] heat of moment,” the progressive journalist wrote. “Whether certain cable/YouTube outlets mislead audiences w/ dishonest claims lacking real evidence, they shouldn’t be targeted.”

Chariton noted that with the precedent having been set for blanket censorship, progressive content was also now being unfairly targeted

Facebook played by far the biggest role for those charged thus far in the Capitol riot. YouTube was a distant second. Parler was way, way, way behind.

Yet it was Parler which Dem politicians demanded be removed from the internet.

Facebook: 97^
Google’s YouTube: 28
Parler: 8

^ Facebook = core FB app 74, Instagram 23
Per DOJ’s 1/6 charging documents with references

https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasb...h=210327410b32

Five posts in a row with no response by anyone else. You appear to be talking to yourself here. Have you thought about seeking out a therapist if you don't already have one?

Five posts in a row with no response by anyone else. You appear to be talking to yourself here. Have you thought about seeking out a therapist if you don't already have one? Originally Posted by 1pittsburgh

Evidently you're still reading his posts. When you don't respond, we'll just infer that you have no counter-argument because you know he's right.