Alex Jones..

Jono8 said:
But this is all just your perception of it. You seem to claim bias without actually proving it. As someone pointed out in this thread a few posts ago a left leaning Youtube was banned for breaking their terms of service also. Furthermore, even if there was bias, it doesn't even matter because they can decide who uses their services and what they don't want posted on their website.
Click to expand...

To be fair, their twitter account got suspended, I know stacks of random people who've had their accounts temporarily suspended for one reason or another, twitter is a bit mental when it comes to account suspensions tbh. FYI for what it's worth Alex Jone's twitter account is up and running right now.

https://twitter.com/RealAlexJones

Jono8 said:
Once again with this "instead people using these global social media platforms, should learn to deal with things they find offensive without relying on some sort of higher authority to sanitise everything for them -" you have seemingly overlooked the money making aspect of their business. Many of the terms in question will be in there because to have that sort of thing on the platform harms advertising revenue. Many companies won't want their products associated with anything to do with him so why should they pay to host his videos and views if they arent getting any money in return from advertising? Also, so what if Facebook and Youtube want to make a platform where people don't have to put up with Alex Jones' nonsense? Alex Jones isnt banned from the internet or banned from talking. You simply can't see his stuff on certain websites. Seriously, what is the big deal? Youtube and Facebook do not want to be associated with him and that is that.

Alex Jones has repeatedly and without question violated their terms of service. The reason he has most likely been singled out, is that he is more well known than most, so naturally complaints about his violations of the terms of service will be larger. He has therefore been highlighted as an abuser of said terms more frequently and so obviously Facebook/Youtube etc have taken action.
Click to expand...

If Facebook and Youtube want to make a platform where people don't have to put up with things like Alex Jones, then they're well within their rights to do that - but I think it's a mistake and I think they've embarked upon a difficult road. The amount of decisions they're going to need to make are infinite - essentially, it won't ever be fair - (as evidenced with groups such as Antifa and other dodgy groups where we both agree - the policy isn't working, or being applied fairly)

I think as far as advertising goes, - yes I understand that Youtube/Facebook/Etc have to make money, however we could get to a stage where the only content that's allowed on the platform is there to appease advertising companies, in the sense that anything that's controversial or naughty gets denoted or removed because nobody wants to have their advertisements associated with it (regardless of the amount of clicks)

We could end up with a situation where people start to lose trust in Social Media because the platforms are there for the advertisers, not for the consumers or content producers, trying to perform censorship like this - in a world where the definition of something offensive, changes every other day, might drive people away from the platforms - or cause different platforms to be created that become safe-havens for maniacs.

Interesting argument on Bill Maher;

 
Thecaferacer said:
Trying to indoctrinate young boys into overly liberal progressive culture, when all they want to do is grow up and figure out trying to manage their hormones and emotions isn't going to help. You just need to let them express themselves without being demonised and let them find the middle ground wherever that is.
Click to expand...

I think this is an excellent point.

It seems that the solutions proposed in the twitter post above, feel like a highly reactive and intense 'American' solution to a problem. In the case of young boys who might need a gentle 'steer' in the right direction to keep them on the rails. Instead - they're bombarded with an intense doctrine of political and social stereotypes, rules and red-lines, all of which probably just confuses boys and forces them to one extreme or another, when all they really needed was perhaps a little nudge.
 
bigmike20vt said:
regardless of views, is no one here uncomfortable with their job even being an issue? maybe due to a bias i have due to the blue collar family i come from (dad may not have been academic but he worked his ass off far more than most (defo more than I and i am proud of him) but call centre worker, resource planning, Doctor or brickie, makes naff all difference to the validity of opinion imo.
Click to expand...

It's an interesting point, I'm a software/network automation engineer with absolutely no legal training - but a lot of experience in working for some of the big US tech companies and I learnt one big thing from that experience. These companies value customer experience over absolutely everything else imaginable, that might not mean much to you, but they absolutely obsess over customers and giving the customer what they want.

How is that relevant? When it comes to the social media companies I think it becomes very relevant. As you probably know - social media companies primarily make their money from selling your data to advertising companies, who in turn make money from customers buying their stuff, so you have the users of the platform, then the customers of it; the advertising companies.

The customers are essentially controlling the whole show, if they see their advertisements mixing alongside users posting things which they find "unpalatable" depending on the current societal fads; because they're the paying customer - they hold a lot of sway in dictating what's allows vs what's not allowed on the platform. Because the social media platform is a private system owned by a private company, they construct their own terms and conditions, ergo; they can allow or censor just about anything they like, within the confines of law of the country in which it's operating. (obviously these laws differ drastically from country to country)

The thing I struggle with a little, is that these social media companies have such an enormous critical mass of users (billions) that the rules of who sees what, are essentially being dictated by advertising companies, not the traditional institutions like courts or governments and those rules are driven by one main metric; money. I personally don't think it's very healthy for society to have an industry deciding these things, based purely on it's own business interests, or in the case of cancerous garbage like TikTok - what a foreign government wants you to see. (that's a different topic entirely) :)

In the final analysis, when awful Alex Jones has to pay out $$$$$$$$ to the families of Sandy Hook - I'll be playing the world's smallest violin, and as somebody who doesn't use social media at all - none of this affects me. I guess I just feel a hint of trepidation when I see kids swarming around these platforms, and they're being re-educated on what's good/bad by frankly - whoever has the most cash..
 
chroniclard said:
They are being driven by what society thinks is good or bad, not driven by what the advertiser/customer/company sees as good or bad.
Click to expand...

I don't really agree; Pretty much all of society unanimously agrees that junk food advertising aimed at kids on social media is bad, but the advertiser (or influencers, or whoever) gets insane amounts of revenue from it - so they do it, and they'll continue to do it until a goverment steps in and forces them to stop by writing laws.
 
Freakbro said:
Seems you are wrong mike, people do think that making highly hurtful / offensive accusations against specific people without offering a shred of evidence to back up said comments isn't pretty clear cut, as it's all ok if it's for eNtErTaInMeNt!
Click to expand...

And that's the fun thing about today, you can make a ton of money instantly by just making a load of stuff up for shock value, in a way that's never been possible up until a decade or so ago.

The legal systems are so slow and out of touch, that it takes them years and years to actually get someone into court to pay for the damage they cause. If you have no morals and don't care - it's totally worth the risk for someone like Alex Jones.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom