Alex Jones..

JRS said:
And if you're okay with OcUK's stance on swearing but not okay with YT's stance on posting utter trash that precious few advertisers¹ want to be within nine miles of, where d'you draw that particular line?

¹ - advertising being the thing that keeps the lights on at YT after all...
Click to expand...

It's not a very good comparison, simply living within the rules of the forum by not swearing isn't de-platforming someone, or really censoring them - it's just making sure everyone moderates their language and keeps it a family friendly place - it doesn't stifle or prevent any specific narrative from being spoken.

I'm not going to try it (lol) but I'm pretty sure, that like some other people on here, if I rant and rave about conspiracy theories, nonsense and other such things - provided I don't swear, threaten or spam, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be banned. [There are many examples of this with previous posters in other threads]
 
Screeeech said:
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.
Click to expand...
Actually reputable advertising organisations and the companies paying for the adverts do care about where the adverts are shown, they care quite a bit about it.
The reason being they'll spend a fortune building an image for their brand (be it safe for kids, friendly to women, good for manly men, showing how safe their airline is), having their products put along side someone who is spewing nonsense about chem trails from commercial airlines isn't going to go down well with say American Airlines or BA, whilst Disney etc are not going to be happy about adverts for thir kids products showing inbetween bull about how murdered kids were really actors.

Advertisers are often incredibly picky about how and where they'll spend their money, and even when they're not massively picky they object to the chance of being associated with something that is actively harmful to their image.
 
Screeeech said:
It's not a very good comparison, simply living within the rules of the forum by not swearing isn't de-platforming someone, or really censoring them - it's just making sure everyone moderates their language and keeps it a family friendly place - it doesn't stifle or prevent any specific narrative from being spoken.
Click to expand...

So? They are still censoring speech on their platform, which is apparently wrong according to clowns like you
 
Screeeech said:
It's not a very good comparison, simply living within the rules of the forum by not swearing isn't de-platforming someone, or really censoring them - it's just making sure everyone moderates their language and keeps it a family friendly place - it doesn't stifle or prevent any specific narrative from being spoken.

I'm not going to try it (lol) but I'm pretty sure, that like some other people on here, if I rant and rave about conspiracy theories, nonsense and other such things - provided I don't swear, threaten or spam, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be banned. [There are many examples of this with previous posters in other threads]
Click to expand...

Because posting conspiracy theories isn't against the forum rules. Swearing while doing so would be, so would attacking other posters with no attempt at meaningful debate (e.g. calling someone an idiot for believing that the Apollo missions landed men on the moon without providing a shred of evidence to support your assertion, that's certainly happened once or twice on here over the years!). Certain sections of the forum (Speaker's Corner for one) have tougher standards for debate and can see you barred from them while still able to access the rest of the site.

So I say again - what's the line? Where is it okay in your eyes for a company to say "hey, we have rules here that you're violating, so you're off our platform"?
 
JRS said:
Because posting conspiracy theories isn't against the forum rules. Swearing while doing so would be, so would attacking other posters with no attempt at meaningful debate (e.g. calling someone an idiot for believing that the Apollo missions landed men on the moon without providing a shred of evidence to support your assertion, that's certainly happened once or twice on here over the years!). Certain sections of the forum (Speaker's Corner for one) have tougher standards for debate and can see you barred from them while still able to access the rest of the site.

So I say again - what's the line? Where is it okay in your eyes for a company to say "hey, we have rules here that you're violating, so you're off our platform"?
Click to expand...

wherever the hell they feel like, since it is THEIR platform. that's the clue
 
Evangelion said:
It's fine with me. Their platform, their rules. Can't use their platform without first agreeing to abide by their rules. Break their rules, and you get a kick in the nuts.

Pretty simple.
Click to expand...

yeah but these clowns only disagree with censorship (by a business/company) if is a form of censorship they disagree with - they bleat on about slippery slopes and freedom of speech when it suits them
 
StriderX said:
Oh please, your attempts to ignore it's rise is FAR worse. I sincerely hope you don't have any people close to you that are not born naturally "British" in the Christian-"patriot" view.

As they wont be welcome for much longer in your insular hatred filled future of an island.
Click to expand...
I think there's more hatred for the "loony left" and/or "liberal" extremists than for non-Brits :p

I.e. the people who are actively trying to destroy this country from the inside out, with their irrational hatred of anything that might be considered Western culture or values. Plus their not-at-all-concealed hatred of "cis-gender" whites. Topped with a healthy dose of pandering to islamic radicals thrown in for good measure.
 
DreadNiK said:
yes, yes it is. the answer is no. why is this so hard to grasp? oh wait, because you have an agenda and don't actually care about facts.
Click to expand...

Are you sure?

Google: Is Google a PUBLIC company?

https://www.google.com/about/our-company/

Google said:
"Since the beginning, our goal has been to develop services that significantly improve the lives of as many people as possible.

Not just for some. For everyone."

"We believe everyone deserves the chance to learn, succeed, and be heard"

"To mark our 2004 initial public offering..."]
Click to expand...

Do you have an agenda also? If so, you had better tell Google they need to sort themselves out! Now I will leave you to argue with them, rather than have the good graces...[/b]
 
RaohNS - if you want a say in how Google operates, buy shares in them. That's how publicly traded companies work - they do what's best for their shareholders. And clearly it made business sense for publicly traded companies such as YouTube (parent company Google LLC, owner Alphabet Inc.), Spotify, Apple Inc. and so on to remove Alex Jones from their various platforms. If it didn't make business sense, they wouldn't have done it - that's why Twitter for example is yet to ban Jones outright. Though he did somehow manage to get suspended for a week even with Twitter's incredibly low standards for behaviour, quite an achievement...
 
JRS said:
RaohNS - if you want a say in how Google operates, buy shares in them. That's how publicly traded companies work - they do what's best for their shareholders. And clearly it made business sense for publicly traded companies such as YouTube (parent company Google LLC, owner Alphabet Inc.), Spotify, Apple Inc. and so on to remove Alex Jones from their various platforms. If it didn't make business sense, they wouldn't have done it - that's why Twitter for example is yet to ban Jones outright. Though he did somehow manage to get suspended for a week even with Twitter's incredibly low standards for behaviour, quite an achievement...
Click to expand...

Lower down the field theirs been a few cases where bad decisions (banning people or thing you don't agree with) have force people to close up shop or scale back majorly.
 
What I've yet to see pointed out also is Facebook aren't really unbiased. They are a left leaning company who employ people who are left leaning.

I had a friend who applied for a job with Facebook and they had to undergo rigorous personality tests.
What they are doing there is ensuring the staff they are employing are liberal minded.

What we are seeing with these companies is complete hypocrisy. Either apply the rules to ALL. Or none at all. If you aren't letting Alex speculate about world events then why the hell do they allow absolute basket cases such as Antifa and BLM to spew their messages and encourage violence?

The swamp that is Facebook is now overrun and controlled by liberals. So expect people with differing opinions to be slowly banned.
 
JRS said:
RaohNS - if you want a say in how Google operates, buy shares in them. That's how publicly traded companies work - they do what's best for their shareholders. And clearly it made business sense for publicly traded companies such as YouTube (parent company Google LLC, owner Alphabet Inc.), Spotify, Apple Inc. and so on to remove Alex Jones from their various platforms. If it didn't make business sense, they wouldn't have done it - that's why Twitter for example is yet to ban Jones outright. Though he did somehow manage to get suspended for a week even with Twitter's incredibly low standards for behaviour, quite an achievement...
Click to expand...

My point being their publicly stated items are not in line with their actions. So Google isn't a private company as people have been saying. Now this has been shown, they now deflect the thrust of their argument.

This is called moving the goal posts. Their platform I not for everyone, but their size is undoubtedly a worrying thing. Google/YT/Facebook are more than huge mega corps. They have the chance to forever change the direction we head. They know now.
 
CosmicClown said:
What I've yet to see pointed out also is Facebook aren't really unbiased. They are a left leaning company who employ people who are left leaning.

I had a friend who applied for a job with Facebook and they had to undergo rigorous personality tests.
What they are doing there is ensuring the staff they are employing are liberal minded.

What we are seeing with these companies is complete hypocrisy. Either apply the rules to ALL. Or none at all. If you aren't letting Alex speculate about world events then why the hell do they allow absolute basket cases such as Antifa and BLM to spew their messages and encourage violence?

The swamp that is Facebook is now overrun and controlled by liberals. So expect people with differing opinions to be slowly banned.
Click to expand...
It's "liberals" :p The quotes are important :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom