Posted on 04/12/2018 7:09:53 AM PDT by davikkm
He does not ban users blindly through an algorithm, he gives them many warnings in advance that they are violating the rules, and then the people who do get banned are clearly banned for cause, often for taunting.
There are people who take liberal views here, but they are expected to defend their positions articulately, preferably with Constitutional, federal, or state law citations. Respectful disagreement is welcomed.
He does not ban people simply to suppress a point of view.
-PJ
Conservatives aren’t people, therefore, we do not harm any people...
They ask these questions the wrong way.
FR doesn’t control 80 percent of the ad revenue like Google and Facebook do. They are not only censoring opinions they are attempting to cause financial harm to those with incorrect opinions. Restraint of trade.
FR is a user supported site and is thus different. They have also show good judgement is removing comments.
You’re a purist who would lose the war in order to make a point.
Oh i like the way you think.
So, what, the “2 wrongs make a right” argument?
They are either Delusional or Pathological.. So the blank face comes easy to them.
Mark Zuckerberg: ‘We Don’t Think’
Could’ve stopped there.
>FB promotes itself as a public forum platform, available for equal access and use by all. As such, they are protected from liability by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA). Yes, FB can censor speech, as they now are doing, and in doing so they should lose their status as a public forum and become a regular 1st Amendment entity, such as newspapers and magazines. They should lose their CDA immunity and be liable for the content of every post by their 3 billion members. FB wants it both ways; it must not permitted to operate in such a manner.
This. This. A thousand times, this. It needs to be shouted from the rooftops and appear in civil and criminal suits against Facebook, Google/Youtube, Twitter, Reddit, and the rest.
As soon as they exercised editorial authority, they became responsible for every vile, gross, and/or illegal item you let through; every threat of violence, every message speaking to illegal behavior, every picture, every solicitation.
Listen to what Ted Cruz says during his questioning of Zuckerberg. He builds a nice little box around the legalities Facebook may be violating.
Germans in the 1940's (who attended church every Sunday, had neat yards and beautiful flower boxes) didn't think they were doing anything wrong either. They were 'protecting' the good people from 'the Jews'.
Racists in the American South didn't think they were doing anything wrong by keeping ALL blacks out of newsrooms and newspaper jobs - they were protecting citizens from bad ideas.
Zuckerberg and his goons aren't 'censoring speech' they're protecting the 'good people' from hearing the position of 'deplorables'...
Lucas Nolan knows that, right?
Mega fines for Facebook is called maggot control.
“FB is functions as a public utility because of its size.”
Then file a suit and prove it in a court of law. Until then, this is just your opinion and not a fact, and the same laws apply to facebook as to any other website.
“Private companies that provide public access to their services may not discriminate based on sex, race, or speech. They are in violation of civil rights laws.”
Which civil rights law exactly talks about discrimination based on speech?!?
Exactly Zuck is a NWO Nazi who must be sterilized!
No,they are not censoring speech...except for the speech they don’t like.
YOu got it exactly right.
But them along comes a patriot president who calls it like it is, and you know, I enjoyed watching Zuckerberg the liberal fascist squirm in his seat. Now they need to take him down a few notches by imposing principles of 1st amendment speech on his Corporate operation, or filing an Anti trust suit.
If not, then there soon will be a huge lawsuit which will be a class action by conservatives , that will go all the way to SCOTUS.
I personally believe the Zux is a criminal for what he did for Obama and Sec State Clinton during Arab Spring.His activity caused the deaths of thousands of innocents. It would not surprise me is he was then working for Brennan.He should be indicted by the Criminal Court of the Hague, and then frog marched into a French Gulag , there to rot for a few years for his transgressions against humanity
I see these arguments a lot about Facebook, but I haven’t seen anyone present a single example of either the public accommodations provisions of the civil rights act applied against websites, or provide an example of a website being judged a monopoly and subject to regulation as a public utility.
If there are no such precedents, then these argument seem like just a bunch of special pleading, “these laws don’t apply to anything else on the internet, but they should apply to Facebook because they’re our enemies!”
Oh, the class action lawsuits are comming, bank on it.
For the above and also for tracking non-users. I never agreed to anything with them and yet they track me.
By not ensuring fair play you are allowing them to regulate and shutdown conservative thought.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.