Posted on 01/10/2021 6:43:22 PM PST by E. Pluribus Unum
The Big Tech giants want to be regulated.
Yes, you read that right.
Big Tech knows that if online speech is regulated by the federal government, either directly or indirectly via regulation of tech companies, they can and will weaponize it against The People and stifle competition.
Big Tech oligarchs have tried everything to destroy Gab.com and stop our industry-leading free speech software from reaching the masses.
They banned us from both app stores, yet we still continued to grow.
Then they banned us from hosting providers, so we built our own.
Then they banned us from Paypal, Stripe, Coinbase, Square, and more. So we educated our community on free speech money and the great people on Gab started mailing us physical checks to keep the site online.
Then they blacklisted my family from Visa in a Chinese Communist Party social credit score-style form of tyranny.
Despite being banned by 25+ service providers including domain registrars, hosting platforms, app stores, email services, ecommerce services, and more: Gab has survived and continues to thrive.
Gab exists outside of the establishment’s control. They don’t like this, at all. Their monopoly on the free flow of information is coming to an end because Gab is inevitable.
When all else failed, Big Tech and the establishment have set their sights on using Big Government to crush Gab and other alternative technology startups by destroying Section 230 and lobbying for regulation of speech on the internet.
Regulation will solidify Big Tech’s already overpowered and abusive market monopolies.
What folks need to understand is that Section 230 does not protect the speech of Big Tech companies. When Big Tech “fact checks” user content they are acting as a publisher and Section 230 immunity does not apply. As such, they can be held accountable for that speech.
Section 230 doesn’t apply to Big Tech’s editorializing. The First Amendment does. Section 230 only applies to content that users post on their platforms. It provides no protections for Big Tech’s own speech. They can and should be punished for the false information they are giving the public by weaponizing this editorialization of user content
In the case of the Coronavirus, Big Tech has been using the WHO as an “authority” on health related matters instead of official health guidelines from the President of the United States. This is a matter of national security and public health.
The same goes for editorializing election-related content. By “fact checking” one candidate and not another Big Tech is giving an in-kind campaign contribution of enormous and immeasurable monetary value to the Biden campaign. Big Tech should be investigated by the FEC for these in-kind campaign contributions to the Biden campaign. The RNC has filed a report on it, so let’s hope the FEC takes action.
Big Tech had record stock market performance under the Trump administration and how are they repaying him?
By helping the Democrats spread the Russian hoax narrative. By “fact checking” him and not Joe Biden. By censoring links to news stories about Biden.
The President can and should trust bust the Big Tech monopolies, in particular Apple and Google’s duopoly on mobile app distribution along with Facebook and Google’s duopoly on online advertising and search. The only big reason he hasn’t is because Big Tech stocks make up a significant portion of the stock market growth he likes to tout.
If the market needs to take a hit in order to destroy a domestic threat to freedom and the flow of information online then so be it. We do not worship the stock market in America, we worship almighty God. Your 401k gains aren’t worth the future of the Republic, sorry.
My point is: don’t fall for the Section 230 narrative. It’s a distraction. There are plenty of other things that can be done to stop Big Tech tyranny.
The President vastly underestimates how much influence he has online. Antitrust, FEC investigations, and more aside: if the President were to promote free speech technology platforms like Gab, the Big Tech panopticon would collapse on itself and fast.
I just hope the President realizes this before it’s too late.
I fear that his time on Big Tech platforms is quickly running out.
God bless,
Andrew Torba CEO, Gab.com October 16, 2020 Jesus is King
[The President can and should trust bust the Big Tech monopolies, in particular Apple and Google’s duopoly on mobile app distribution along with Facebook and Google’s duopoly on online advertising and search. The only big reason he hasn’t is because Big Tech stocks make up a significant portion of the stock market growth he likes to tout. ]
Repealing Section 230 was a red herring intentionally planted to sidetrack discussion of preventing what is now happening.
I wouldn’t trust the current government to regulate anything in this current climate right now that does not in some way screw the American people.
Isn’t it funny that the people cheering shutting down Trump in Twitter and shutting down Parler, were all for Net Neutrality?
.
“I do agree, however, that Trump’s unwillingness to go after these companies using the courts, rather than just tweets, was a mistake.”
In all fairness, even if he DID attempt to use the courts to go after those companies, do you REALLY think the courts, especially when they’re staffed by Obama holdovers, are going to follow through with what Trump wants to do?
yeah. they’re for 230, right torba. that’s why the fought so hard against it two weeks ago.
Screw it, do an EO relating to terroristic, insurrectionist, and related assistance to distort and hide the truth of said efforts thus being guilty of terrorist aiding and abetting...
You are to be shut off from this moment forward and all assets to be forget by previous EO.
All financial and personal assets of those owners, shareholders, employees and contractors globally shall also be seized.
That is all.
Lol! Brilliant!
Big corporations love regulations, because small businesses struggle with them.
[In all fairness, even if he DID attempt to use the courts to go after those companies, do you REALLY think the courts, especially when they’re staffed by Obama holdovers, are going to follow through with what Trump wants to do?]
“If you build it, they will come.” - Terence Mann
Yeah, and that 5-4 supreme court majority didn’t help regarding stopping voter fraud.
Why, yes, we need the “fairness” doctrine back./s
[Yeah, and that 5-4 supreme court majority didn’t help regarding stopping voter fraud.]
As I’ve said elsewhere, Trump set up these election challenges, while hiring the lowest-cost, most incompetent lawyers in the nation, to get set up for another run. If he weren’t running again, he’d have conceded from the git-go. He *knew* there was no way he could prevail, and therefore chose to use this pivotal moment as a fund-raising opportunity, as well as a chance to create a bloody shirt meme he could use in 2024’s campaign. Easier to fund-raise now, when the crime - unprovable in the limited time frame available - was fresh in everyone’s minds. Also what better time to sear the memory of the steal in the psyches of his supporters, when the printer’s ink on the fraudulent ballots might not even have cured? I think it’s a brilliant strategy, health permitting.
In case you’re wondering, Trump has raised hundreds of millions*, while spending a few million on lawyers. That’s a huge 2024 campaign war chest ready to go. And if he runs, his name alone will psych out all potential GOP challengers. Anyone who beats him in the primaries is guaranteed to lose in the general** since, at minimum, 10% of the GOP vote will stay home or vote for the other guy just to stick it to the Judas. And that’s not just for that election, but in *any* future election. Which is why no serious GOP contender will challenge Trump.
* That small-dollar fund-raising prowess is unheard of, for a political candidate who just lost an election. Ask Hillary what happened to her fund-raising ability after she lost in 2016. Millions of people struggling under the weight of pandemic-shutdown and -recession related financial stress shelled out to help Trump get over this hump. GOP pols recognize this, which is why only one House member, Kinzinger, and one Senator, Romney have joined the impeachment drive.
** And not just in the general. Whatever GOP seat he’s currently occupying is toast in the next election, since Trump voters will remember all the bad things he said about Trump during the presidential primaries, and repay him in kind.
[Yeah, and that 5-4 supreme court majority didn’t help regarding stopping voter fraud.]
Q: Why are you running again, you loser?
A: Because it was stolen from me. I expected some degree of fraud, and prepped for that, but they amped the deceit and finagling up to 11 on a 10 point scale. You need a no holds-barred street fighter like me to win in 2024.
I know that among Trump’s supporters, there are any number of shibboleths about how Trump is very, very smart. It’s not just a throwaway remark. If he hadn’t devoted his life towards running various businesses, there’s a reasonable chance Trump could have been an accomplished egghead. It certainly runs in the family:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_G._Trump
Now, he’s not clairvoyant, and he is human. But don’t take any of the surface stuff at face value*. Some of it is kayfabe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kayfabe, which is what many of the outsiders who deal personally with him can’t wrap their heads around. Professional pols do some kayfabe. Trump does extreme kayfabe, to the point many pols think of him as un-presidential. Has there ever been a president who talked like a pro wrestling emcee? He really cracks me up.
* Note that I think Q is a little overwrought, and neither follow him nor believe any of his assertions.
Interesting.
Forget Section 230. Follow the lead of Poland. They’re passing a law fining social media companies $2.2 million each time they ban lawful speech.
Then prohibit social media companies and search engines from surveilling and tracking their customers and prohibit them from owning more than one platform (such as Facebook owning Instagram.)
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.