Alex Jones..

[Screeeech]

I'm not sure anyone is arguing about whether or not he broke the T's and C's, for me it's more around how these companies that arguably provide connectivity to billions of people, are at the same time exerting more censorship powers, than any law or government in the world. Essentially they're becoming the decision makers in who gets to see and hear what. Whether it's due to T's and C's or community policy is irrelevant, in practical terms, the impact of these policies are far reaching and borderless - without any external influence, nobody has a say.

I'm not for one second going to argue that people like Alex Jones have legitimate viewpoints, I'm just worried about who's calling the shots and how things may play out in future, with regard to these companies, who are in effect exercising far more censorship power than any government or authority.

My personal view, is that Alex Jones's madness should be protected, that way - when it's out in the open, it can be taken for the trash that it is, by attempting to shut it down - risks creating far more hullabaloo than simply allowing it in the first place - maniac's gonna maniac, and all that.

Ok yes - he said crazy unforgivable things about Sandy Hook, but meh - for me it's far more harmless when he's out in the open spouting it, rather than forcing him underground, trying to shut him down essentially enforces many of the positions him and his supporters take.

idk - just not convinced it's the right approach.

 

[JRS]

idk - just not convinced it's the right approach.

So the right approach would be forcing companies to provide him a platform?

 

[Dave M]

Love to break your fantasy bubble, but Nazi Germany was defeated a long time ago, there is no real "Nazis" anymore

The idea never died, you see it daily, hear it daily, Brexit is the voice of it, Macron is the voice of it, Merkel bullied by Bavaria over Migration, is the voice of it. UKIP, AFD, PEGIDA, FN, Podemos, LN.

It's like the fairies in Peter Pan - Every time you deny a liberal voice a Fascist voice pops into existence.

 

[StriderX]

I'm not sure anyone is arguing about whether or not he broke the T's and C's, for me it's more around how these companies that arguably provide connectivity to billions of people, are at the same time exerting more censorship powers, than any law or government in the world. Essentially they're becoming the decision makers in who gets to see and hear what. Whether it's due to T's and C's or community policy is irrelevant, in practical terms, the impact of these policies are far reaching and borderless - without any external influence, nobody has a say.

I'm not for one second going to argue that people like Alex Jones have legitimate viewpoints, I'm just worried about who's calling the shots and how things may play out in future, with regard to these companies, who are in effect exercising far more censorship power than any government or authority.

My personal view, is that Alex Jones's madness should be protected, that way - when it's out in the open, it can be taken for the trash that it is, by attempting to shut it down - risks creating far more hullabaloo than simply allowing it in the first place - maniac's gonna maniac, and all that.

Ok yes - he said crazy unforgivable things about Sandy Hook, but meh - for me it's far more harmless when he's out in the open spouting it, rather than forcing him underground, trying to shut him down essentially enforces many of the positions him and his supporters take.

idk - just not convinced it's the right approach.

Oh please... him and his supporters will never listen to reason, the fact that a lot of them actually believe his crap conspiracies is telling enough in how unexceptionally dumb they are. The rest are just trolls who also happen to be racist *****.

There is no longer any legitimate way to reach consensus, it's just violence from here on, it's bloody brilliant.

 

[BowdonUK]

I think the people totally defending private companies right to cease a service to you should be careful what they wish for. Because if that becomes normalised then what if one day someone doesn't like you. They could push you off-grid with no comeback.

When we think of legal structures we have to imagine, what would my worst enemy do to me, and how can that be counter-balanced?

Oh please... him and his supporters will never listen to reason, the fact that a lot of them actually believe his crap conspiracies is telling enough in how unexceptionally dumb they are. The rest are just trolls who also happen to be racist *****.

I'm surprised you take that position as you sail close to the wind yourself... or is it your personal dislike of alex jones that takes precedence?

 

[angel102]

The idea never died, you see it daily, hear it daily, Brexit is the voice of it, Macron is the voice of it, Merkel bullied by Bavaria over Migration, is the voice of it. UKIP, AFD, PEGIDA, FN, Podemos, LN.

It's like the fairies in Peter Pan - Every time you deny a liberal voice a Fascist voice pops into existence.

incredible the amount of people who think that all the Nazi's suddenly stopped thinking like Nazi's the moment Berlin fell.

 

[angel102]

I think the people totally defending private companies right to cease a service to you should be careful what they wish for. Because if that becomes normalised then what if one day someone doesn't like you. They could push you off-grid with no comeback.

When we think of legal structures we have to imagine, what would my worst enemy do to me, and how can that be counter-balanced?



I'm surprised you take that position as you sail close to the wind yourself... or is it your personal dislike of alex jones that takes precedence?

go walking around Tesco with a megaphone shouting that the beef mince is turning kids gay or that the dried coffee is trying to control your brain and see how long it is before you get escorted out.

 

[StriderX]

I'm surprised you take that position as you sail close to the wind yourself... or is it your personal dislike of alex jones that takes precedence?

I found him hilarious for a few months, then got bored (as i usually do) and realised... damn wait a minute, he's acually got real support here then it all came rather clear when all those networking ultra-nationalists (Bannon, UKIP, Likud, Russia, GOP, Hungary, Poland, FN in France and so forth) started to really make it bleeding obvious how close they were to each other.

It's not a god damn game, if these people get power they RUIN everything, at least CEO's tend to have visions and progress they want to make, Nationalists just want to be insular and hate everything not "of them". I'd frankly rather have a cabal of Apple, Microsoft Amazon and Google than even our current governments at this rate.

At least the transparency of knowing they'll shaft you is far more palatable.

 

[BowdonUK]

go walking around Tesco with a megaphone shouting that the beef mince is turning kids gay or that the dried coffee is trying to control your brain and see how long it is before you get escorted out.

That is a strawman argument because Tesco aren't in the business of encouraging people to have an opinion.

The sign of a free speech society is to defend peoples ability to say any opinion they like, even if you hate it.

If you look at my second line: When we think of legal structures we have to imagine, what would my worst enemy do to me, and how can that be counter-balanced?

The reason why we are in this situation is because the likes of google, facebook, yahoo and others decided to give up carrier status on their platforms. So although they advertise themselves as being social media they now have to police every post people make. The principle that a private company can throw you out for no evidential reason other than to say "hate speech" is worrying. It's the social media today. Tomorrow it might be the ISP's, as you have communicated via them. The day after it might be the phone companies. Would you be happy if your phone company withdrew its service to your house because they had seen some of your posts online and had a complaint?

 

[angel102]

That is a strawman argument because Tesco aren't in the business of encouraging people to have an opinion.

The sign of a free speech society is to defend peoples ability to say any opinion they like, even if you hate it.

If you look at my second line: When we think of legal structures we have to imagine, what would my worst enemy do to me, and how can that be counter-balanced?

The reason why we are in this situation is because the likes of google, facebook, yahoo and others decided to give up carrier status on their platforms. So although they advertise themselves as being social media they now have to police every post people make. The principle that a private company can throw you out for no evidential reason other than to say "hate speech" is worrying. It's the social media today. Tomorrow it might be the ISP's, as you have communicated via them. The day after it might be the phone companies. Would you be happy if your phone company withdrew its service to your house because they had seen some of your posts online and had a complaint?

The Nazi's didn't tell people to leave, in fact they actively discouraged it at the time, that's the difference, because forcing someone to stay until you can steal all their belongings and load them onto cattle wagons is not the ******* same as Youtube telling someone they can't use their platform anymore, it's about 3.9million miles away from what the Nazi's did. So stop telling me it's a strawman for saying a private company has a right to remove someone from the premises because they are actively causing a disturbance and breaking terms and conditions they literally agreed to when they start posting content.

 

[BowdonUK]

I found him hilarious for a few months, then got bored (as i usually do) and realised... damn wait a minute, he's acually got real support here then it all came rather clear when all those networking ultra-nationalists (Bannon, UKIP, Likud, Russia, GOP, Hungary, Poland, FN in France and so forth) started to really make it bleeding obvious how close they were to each other.

It's not a god damn game, if these people get power they RUIN everything, at least CEO's tend to have visions and progress they want to make, Nationalists just want to be insular and hate everything not "of them". I'd frankly rather have a cabal of Apple, Microsoft Amazon and Google than even our current governments at this rate.

At least the transparency of knowing they'll shaft you is far more palatable.

Ok. So what if 5 years from now all those parties either get in power or retain power and we have a real surge to the extreme right. They could bring in laws against the social media sites. This is why the site ceo's all visit governments for meetings. Because they dont want laws put on them.

So if all those people get in, your nightmare. They might say to the social media sites, "Hmm we don't like what StriderX as been writing about us. Get rid of him or you'll have problems later". The precedent as been set here. That if you have an opinion that the people in power don't like then you'll be pushed off-grid and you won't be able to stop them as its been done before.

I'm not a fan of jones myself. It's nearly impossible to look in to the issues he raises as he starts acting like an idiot. Jones used to be a lot more popular back in the day, ironically when he was less well known, before he jumped on the Trump train. But everyone knows what Jones is like. Him being on the platform and people seeing him for what he is, as the joker, was the best way to contain him. Now the people who don't know much about him just see him as a person persecuted for his opinions.

 

[BowdonUK]

The Nazi's didn't tell people to leave, in fact they actively discouraged it at the time, that's the difference, because forcing someone to stay until you can steal all their belongings and load them onto cattle wagons is not the ******* same as Youtube telling someone they can't use their platform anymore, it's about 3.9million miles away from what the Nazi's did. So stop telling me it's a strawman for saying a private company has a right to remove someone from the premises because they are actively causing a disturbance and breaking terms and conditions they literally agreed to when they start posting content.

Both are very authoritarian positions to take.

The objective of a free society is for everyone to be able to have their free speech.

Don't you think Nazi's would do this in the modern era? You don't think that if your nightmate people got in to power they wouldnt start pushing people out?

It would be more like Communist Soviet Union. Peoples voices being silence never to be heard online again.

So like I said before, if your phone company cut you off because they didn't like some of your online activity, you'd be happy about that?

This isn't like the whole gay cake issue that we've all talked about before. Because in that situation the customer could just go somewhere else for a cake. The option was there. But in this situation all the cake shops wouldnt bake a gay cake. It then makes the situation totally different.

 

[angel102]

Both are very authoritarian positions to take.

The objective of a free society is for everyone to be able to have their free speech.

Don't you think Nazi's would do this in the modern era? You don't think that if your nightmate people got in to power they wouldnt start pushing people out?

It would be more like Communist Soviet Union. Peoples voices being silence never to be heard online again.

So like I said before, if your phone company cut you off because they didn't like some of your online activity, you'd be happy about that?

This isn't like the whole gay cake issue that we've all talked about before. Because in that situation the customer could just go somewhere else for a cake. The option was there. But in this situation all the cake shops wouldnt bake a gay cake. It then makes the situation totally different.

If I was livestreaming BT Sports to other people for less money than they would have to pay BT then yes, I would fully expect BT to cut me off, I certainly wouldn't be surprised if they did so.

 

[FoxEye]

The idea never died, you see it daily, hear it daily, Brexit is the voice of it, Macron is the voice of it, Merkel bullied by Bavaria over Migration, is the voice of it. UKIP, AFD, PEGIDA, FN, Podemos, LN.

It's like the fairies in Peter Pan - Every time you deny a liberal voice a Fascist voice pops into existence.

LOL, over-dramatise much?

Brexit is the "voice of Nazism"? Oh dear.

That's worse than the remainers claiming that "We didn't vote for a Brexit that would actually be Brexit, because..." No, you've gone one step further and claimed that those who voted for Brexit are in some way connected to Nazism. Or sympathetic to it. Or agents of it. Implying some kind of connection to it. Which is of course absurd to the extreme.

 

[Dave M]

LOL, over-dramatise much?

Brexit is the "voice of Nazism"? Oh dear.

That's worse than the remainers claiming that "We didn't vote for a Brexit that would actually be Brexit, because..." No, you've gone one step further and claimed that those who voted for Brexit are in some way connected to Nazism. Or sympathetic to it. Or agents of it. Implying some kind of connection to it. Which is of course absurd to the extreme.

Lol. Liberals aren't to blame for whatever you hate about your life.

There's no real 'nazism', that was a representation of certain ideas at a certain time. But it's niave in the extreme to think no other humans had those ideas before, during or since.

 

[FoxEye]

It's a bit of a cop-out that you're being so intentionally vague.

First you claim that various elements of society are essentially supporting/endorsing Nazism, then you decide there's not really any such thing as Nazism; lastly assert that Nazism is such a broad and/or vague concept that any number of groups could be said to practice Nazism, before or since.

None of which is at all convincing, because it all just appears to be what you choose to believe to justify being an atrocious "liberal"

 

[Screeeech]

So the right approach would be forcing companies to provide him a platform?

Nobody is 'forcing' these companies to provide any platform at all, they do it to make lots of money and gather information on people, nobody is forcing them to do anything. That said - these companies now find themselves in the position, of exercising far more censorship and real control than any companies or governments who've existed before.

Another problem, is that in the history of things - as far as I can tell, actually de-platforming people has never really solved a problem - there might be a collective sigh of relief when someone swings the ban hammer, but overall - I think trying to silence voices like Alex Jones causes more problems than it solves.

Oh please... him and his supporters will never listen to reason, the fact that a lot of them actually believe his crap conspiracies is telling enough in how unexceptionally dumb they are. The rest are just trolls who also happen to be racist *****.

There is no longer any legitimate way to reach consensus, it's just violence from here on, it's bloody brilliant.

Of course they won't listen, they're all idiots - but to me it sounds like you have some misplaced belief, that the majority of people are all super clever and get their information from good sources seems to me that you're angling for perfection and balance in a world full of clowns.

In my eyes, it would be far simpler, easier and probably safer in the long run - to let him run his mouth off, idiots will idiot - but they'll be doing it out in the open where it's easier to discuss and laugh at, rather than sidelining them, sending them underground and potentially making things more dangerous.

 

[D.P.]

No one is actually trying to Silence scumbags like Jones.
Googles advertisers simply don;t want their ads associated with such disgusting views. Google doesn't want to loose advertising revenue. They also don't want to to appear to be providing free services that support the spread of vile misinformation because it will have a long term financial cost.

 

[KillBoY_UK]

No one is actually trying to Silence scumbags like Jones.
Googles advertisers simply don;t want their ads associated with such disgusting views. Google doesn't want to loose advertising revenue. They also don't want to to appear to be providing free services that support the spread of vile misinformation because it will have a long term financial cost.

Wasn't just google though was it....

 

[Screeeech]

No one is actually trying to Silence scumbags like Jones.
Googles advertisers simply don;t want their ads associated with such disgusting views. Google doesn't want to loose advertising revenue. They also don't want to to appear to be providing free services that support the spread of vile misinformation because it will have a long term financial cost.

I think this is nonsense.

Put yourself in the shoes of an advertising company; You think you're going to care if your ads appear in unsavoury places? Rubbish - ads are there to be seen and clicked on, because they generate revenue - nobody is getting salty and upset because the people doing the clicking happen to be total cretins, their clicks are worth just as much as the next person.