Posted on 09/09/2018 6:01:58 AM PDT by davikkm
Facebook is a publicly traded stock not a privately owned company. As such it falls under the purview of the SEC and federal law. So discriminatory acts can be punished. They are also open to class action lawsuits.
I can recall, nigh onto 2 decades ago...Googleing the word FAILURE..guess what the first item was ? —
George (Dubya) Bush...Ain’t nuttin new with those so n sos in Kailifornicate..
SOAB!!! I used to work on that ratbastard ellison’s Jag when I had My shop.
Got to go wash My hands again...
You live....you learn.
They have an obligation not to commit fraud.
By private I meant non-governmental.
Sure you can sue them til the cows come home. There is not a jury that would find in your favor.
You all want to use their tools to work for us. That is a non winner from the start. You have to change the game.
Getting frustrated and pounding the table is not going to do anything but get your hand hurt.
Conspiracy is difficult to prove against the mafia, it will be near impossible against these guys.
Facebook is starting to fall apart. Just stop going to them. The kids are not using it. It’s all old folks now. Just stop using it.
But to state they have a moral obligation to be truthful is extremely difficult to refute.
You can't start your own newspaper if I control all the ink and I won't sell you any.
You can't start your own newspaper if I control all the paper mills and I won't sell you any.
You can't start your own newspaper if I control all the printing presses and I won't sell you any.
The better solution is to build your own communications tool to present “our” version of the truth.
So conservatives should just build their own internet, wires and everything, from the ground up?
I never did use it.
But when they sell themselves as a way for friends to share friendships while in reality they’re scheming to collect personal information about users, it feels like fraud. It probably feels like fraud to billions of people.
Well, that simply indicates that you don’t know how any of this works.
I use it almost exclusively to keep my siblings informed about our mom.
I post pictures of my adult kids because they would otherwise be strangers to my extended family.
I don’t read or engage in political banter. Except with my liberal sister. It’s fun to yank her chain.
Once you understand that the moral obligation has never existed, it makes the whole thing easier to understand. I don’t like it, but it doesn’t bother me as much as it does folks around here.
Exactly
Imagine their actions with. Dem potus and legislature
Our information dissemination is being governed by gen x and y and millennial nerds who don’t hunt or own guns or have any alpha male tendencies and are probanly a plurality of Asians who vote as we know most do
Thst doesn’t count your Filipino wifey so chill freepermsn
Anyone else here deal with DSQUS logarithms?
It’s so stupid..
I just posted and used the word coon and it’s locked under review
Go on BB and write a post that says Jew and it gets reviewed automatically
This is our world....we have many more media options but they still control it
For an individual or group to present themselves as telling the truth is to establish a moral obligation to in fact tell the truth.
But even prior to doing anything is the universal moral obligation to tell the truth.
The only way to escape this moral obligation is to exclude yourself from all use of language, and from thought itself.
Your exclusion from from the use of language and from thought doesn’t have any effect on the absolute obligation to tell the truth, it merely frees you from the potential of violating this obligation.
You are giving this way more thought than it deserves.
I think the amusing part is that the media believes they are telling the truth.
In any event, a few lawsuits are not going to change any of this. The market rules here as well.
I WANT FREE SPEECH!
But not here, silly.
(Excerpt) Read more at...
(After a few words from our clickbait blog sponsors)
The problem here is our government and these social media companies themselves have stated that they have had an affect on past elections. And now are admitting political censorship. So they are admitting obstructing US elections.
Again I repeat Facebook comes under the purview of the SEC and federal laws.
"The MSM” is, essentially, the Associated Press and its membership. The trouble with that is that the AP “wire” is a continuous virtual meeting of the membership of the AP, andI guess you can use the libel laws to sue for information that is false.People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices. - Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations (1776)You have to be “naive as a babe to believe” that, in all the many scores of years since the mid-Nineteenth Century formation of the AP, its members have never found any common interest which is not congruent with the public interest.In fact, since journalism is largely about bad news, journalism is prone to cynicism about society. And journalisms’ human motivation
The man whom we believe is necessarily, in the things concerning which we believe him, our leader and director, and we look up to him with a certain degree of esteem and respect. But as from admiring other people we come to wish to be admired ourselves; so from being led and directed by other people we learn to wish to become ourselves leaders and directors . . .motivates, IMHO, its claims of “journalistic objectivity” which is nothing more than a propagandistic attempt to deny what should be obvious. The reality is thatThe desire of being believed, the desire of persuading, of leading and directing other people, seems to be one of the strongest of all our natural desires. - Adam Smith, Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759)
- freedom of the press is not restricted to members of the AP, and that
- nobody is required to believe anything the AP and its membership says.
The AP and its membership constitutes a massive propaganda conspiracy, not just in the falsehoods which it perpetrates but especially in the truths which it systematically suppresses. It is cynical to claim that journalism’s negativity is objectivity; "the conceit that 'negativity is objectivity’ ” could be the very definition of cynicism.The Associated Press formed before the passage of the Sherman AntiTrust Act, and it conducted its business accordingly. When it was taken to court, ironically by another wire service, the AP was, in 1945, found by SCOTUS to be in violation of Sherman. Seventy years on, "the conservation of scarce, expensive bandwidth in the dissemination of news” is an obsolete rationale for being “too big to fail.” If you’re a wire service, you are in violation of Sherman - and if you’re in violation of Sherman and your nominal mission is obsolete and you are not too big to fail, you should fail.
The problem is not limited to the AP. Another huge problem is the FCC, which puts the imprimatur of the government on the idea that certain organizations which are licensees are “broadcasting in the public interest as public trustees.” The rationale for centralized radio/TV stations is dying; anyone can create youTube channels. The question is whether youTube has to be a common carrier, or if it is practical for “everyone” to make their own youTube and everyone else can make their on search engine to find it
Dennis Prager has trouble with youTube censoring his “Praeger University” videos. What’s up with that?
Fundamentally, tho, commercial, general-interest journalism is negative because the public can’t easily ignore bad news. Which is more attractive to the eyeball - word that all the bus drivers in a city are doing their jobs like they do every day, or word that they are on strike? Even if you don’t live near that city, the question answers itself. Because of that, there will never be “conservative journalism.” Conservative opinion, certainly - but not conservative news reporting. Journalism can’t help but be cynical toward society but, ironically, cynicism toward society and naiveté towards government are two sides of the same coin. The upshot is that journalism is gravitationally attracted to socialism.
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.