Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Mike Honcho

YouTube, Apple and Facebook remove content from InfoWars and Alex Jones

Recommended Posts

 

Saw mention of the lawsuit, didn't know that's what it was about. That on it's own should have been one big strike on all of those platforms.

Not to mention that's just one of many lawsuits. The mystery isn't that he got banned, the Mysteries that he was allowed to go as long as he has. When you spew flat-out slander and libel? Pretty sure that's against the user agreement for any of these platforms.

 

Over and over again he has waited until literally the last day that he could resend something without being subject to litigation and then did some measly weasel worded crap on the back page of one of his many locations and settled out of court.

 

In a case of Seth rich, not only did Fox News itself rescind and apologize for perpetuating that lie, even Alex Jones had to do the same thing. Leaving Hannity is literally the sole remaining member of the media not to rescind back off or apologize .

 

You can bet the radio guns especially are clenching quite a bit right now and putting Hannity on a short leash.

 

If Jones and Hannity followers have any sense of decency or intellect Gummer they would have been off the air already. Of all the things, the Sandy Hook crap was the absolute most detestable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably why nobody's filing criminal charges huh?

Then whats the problem? Let him have his page. There are plenty of equally crazy leftist that still have theirs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe they do. They are all private companies but their business model is to provide that platform. Decisions to stifle free speech because of the political beliefs of the provider are troublesome. They shouldn't be n the censorship business.

Are they stifling Jones because hes a right winger? Or because he deliberately peddles lies that have resulted in harassment and threats?

 

I agree with you that YouTube et al opened up a can of worms and theyre going to be under a lot of scrutiny over this though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then whats the problem? Let him have his page. There are plenty of equally crazy leftist that still have theirs.

Man, this kid's been playing checkers while we've been playing Yahtzee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe they do. They are all private companies but their business model is to provide that platform. Decisions to stifle free speech because of the political beliefs of the provider are troublesome. They shouldn't be n the censorship business.

The president stifles free press, and the bored autocrats dont seem to mind. :dunno:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or because he deliberately peddles lies that have resulted in harassment and threats?

.

pretty sure that was CNN and the whole kids in cages/stripped from there parents fiasco of fake outrage bullschit...but according to you nuts, that's a different and ok fruit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

pretty sure that was CNN and the whole kids in cages/stripped from there parents fiasco of fake outrage bullschit...but according to you nuts, that's a different and ok fruit.

Because you are not telling the whole truth here...as usual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because you are not telling the whole truth here...as usual.

 

 

Mrs. Gilmore owes the IRS two hundred and seventy thousand dollars in back taxes. We have to take the house. And if you can't get the money together in ninety days, we're gonna have to sell the house to someone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

all this does is drive more people away from facebook, YT and apple. People that like Alex Jones fwiw can just goto infowars and watch it on his platform anyways

 

they have given him more pub than he could even wish for

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you are so dedicated to The Culture War that you feel compelled to argue on behalf of Alex Jones, its time for some self evaluation.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should CNN and NBC be barred for their past transgressions?

NBC editing the Trayvon Martin 911 call to make Zimmerman appear racist ?

Or when CNN edited the Keith Scott video to make him appear unarmed?

There are many more weasil intentionally deceitful moves by these and many other main stream media players.

Should they be held to the same standard ? You know TOS and all...mike, snuff ? Wanna give it a stab ?

 

 

pretty sure that was CNN and the whole kids in cages/stripped from there parents fiasco of fake outrage bullschit...but according to you nuts, that's a different and ok fruit.

 

Fruitcake, you gave multiple examples, please show where any of them violated a Terms of Service and what penalties are spelled out in that TOS. Otherwise, you aren't comparing the same things, just another false equivalency argument from you. And by responding to it twice is really two times more than it deserves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you are so dedicated to The Culture War that you feel compelled to argue on behalf of Alex Jones, its time for some self evaluation.

 

its just a matter of balance bro.

 

do I think James Gunn should have been fired, nope, but after Roseanne was, hell yes he should

 

if they came out tomorrow and banned The Young Nazis (Turks) we could call it a wash

 

both are garbage youtubers that spread nothing but lies and misinformation

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you are so dedicated to The Culture War that you feel compelled to argue on behalf of Alex Jones, its time for some self evaluation.

Only a fool would think anyone is arguing for him instead of this being an equal treatment issue i.e. more silencing of conservatives.

 

Again, imagine they did this to Louis Farrakan or Al Sharpton.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

its just a matter of balance bro.

 

do I think James Gunn should have been fired, nope, but after Roseanne was, hell yes he should

 

if they came out tomorrow and banned The Young Nazis (Turks) we could call it a wash

 

both are garbage youtubers that spread nothing but lies and misinformation

 

 

Only a fool would think anyone is arguing for him instead of this being an equal treatment issue i.e. more silencing of conservatives.

 

Again, imagine they did this to Louis Farrakan or Al Sharpton.

 

Matter of balance/equal treatment, are there examples of other groups on those platforms who aren't following the TOS, promoting violence, ignoring account suspensions? I''ll agree with you if that's the case, but if others are following the rules, then isn't it unequal to them that Jones wasn't?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

all this does is drive more people away from facebook, YT and apple. People that like Alex Jones fwiw can just goto infowars and watch it on his platform anyways

 

they have given him more pub than he could even wish for

Respectfully. And seriously, respectfully. I completely disagree. Generally no one gives a sheet. FB, YT, and ESPECIALLY apple are giant organizations. They don't willy nilly a damn thing. If they thought this would seriously hurt them it wouldn't happen.

 

So no. I doubt there will be much impact. In fact there are enough anti extreme right wingers to offset those lost in protest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Raiders and Filthy, you say its not at all about your side in the Culture War, yet you are defending him because you dont want Conservatives silenced....or you want more Liberals to be silenced to make ditching Jones ok. In other words, your opinions are 100% based on the Culture War.

Judge Roseanne on her actions. Judge Gunn on Gunns actions, not Roseannes. Judge Jones on Jones actions. Judge Farrakhan on Farrakhans actions.

Otherwise it never ends. There will always be a past decision you disagree with that you can use to justify a bad decision for your side. And as soon as that happens, the other side has a new misjustice to make your side pay for. And so it goes. The Culture War chasm widens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This video touches on all the reasons why Facebook and other social platforms censoring ANYONE is a bad thing. One of Crowders videos that is not comedy at all and all debate.

 

 

 

All right, I watched that entire video and it was 37 minutes of Crowder misrepresenting the article Constantine wrote and trying to score cheap semantic points on his imaginary scoreboard. Crowder twisted an article about a specific type of harassment into a free speech issue that doesn't exist. Also his arguments about censorship and humans making decisions was absurd, ultimately people make decisions, be it forum moderators/appeals system at twitter or youtube, or judges in real life. I don't see anything in that video that changes my thinking that FB and other social media platforms don't have the right to set and enforce guidelines on how their product will be used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Private businesses should have the right to deny service for any reasons they want. I'm sure I've heard conservatives/Republicans make this argument here many times? What's the problem? Is it because a conservative is being discriminated against?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Private businesses should have the right to deny service for any reasons they want. I'm sure I've heard conservatives/Republicans make this argument here many times? What's the problem? Is it because a conservative is being discriminated against?

 

I have zero problem with them saying who can and can't use their website/service

 

I have a problem with them claiming they aren't unbiased in the situation

 

which is why you have a very smart, uninsulting, well thought man like Dennis Prager suing Youtube for false claims

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I have zero problem with them saying who can and can't use their website/service

 

I have a problem with them claiming they aren't unbiased in the situation

 

which is why you have a very smart, uninsulting, well thought man like Dennis Prager suing Youtube for false claims

Does YouTube have to be fair/unbiased? Maybe they're receiving thousands of complaints a day about Jones? Maybe they believe he's just bad for their targeted audience? Maybe it's personal? I guess my question is if you believe they have a right to refuse service to anyone, does it matter why?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does YouTube have to be fair/unbiased? Maybe they're receiving thousands of complaints a day about Jones? Maybe they believe he's just bad for their targeted audience? Maybe it's personal? I guess my question is if you believe they have a right to refuse service to anyone, does it matter why?

 

from what I have learned from following the lawsuit with Prager, and from Crowder's lawyer, they do not have to be fair and unbiased as long as they claim they are biased and unfair. What the argument is, is that you can't claim you are just a platform of free speech, then demonetize EVERY conservative person, while boosting views of liberals only. I believe Crowder in one thing I watch for example said they tracked their stuff for 7 straight days after it was posted where they received over 1 million views on a video yet never were on the trending list, meanwhile some video from Vox with 100k views is no 1 trending

 

the other issue with youtube at least is that they don't actually have a code of conduct, and when they give you a strike, they don't even tell you why they did so

 

then there is twitter. Crowder himself got banned from twitter, after PAYING Twitter to write an ad they would approve for him, so that he new it was ok, he was then banned from twitter for that ad

 

Youtube comes out tomorrow and says we are a liberal company and will favor and boost liberal media, fine, they are taking claim. What they do now is claim they are nuetral

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ben Shapiro looks like a serial killer in that Joe Rogan thumbnail. Dude definitely killed some kittens when he was a kid. You cant hide those psychopath eyes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ben Shapiro looks like a serial killer in that Joe Rogan thumbnail. Dude definitely killed some kittens when he was a kid. You cant hide those psychopath eyes.

 

its ok he can easily talk his way out of it, and convince you that you actually killed those kittens

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I have zero problem with them saying who can and can't use their website/service

 

I have a problem with them claiming they aren't unbiased in the situation

 

which is why you have a very smart, uninsulting, well thought man like Dennis Prager suing Youtube for false claims

 

 

from what I have learned from following the lawsuit with Prager, and from Crowder's lawyer, they do not have to be fair and unbiased as long as they claim they are biased and unfair. What the argument is, is that you can't claim you are just a platform of free speech, then demonetize EVERY conservative person, while boosting views of liberals only. I believe Crowder in one thing I watch for example said they tracked their stuff for 7 straight days after it was posted where they received over 1 million views on a video yet never were on the trending list, meanwhile some video from Vox with 100k views is no 1 trending

 

the other issue with youtube at least is that they don't actually have a code of conduct, and when they give you a strike, they don't even tell you why they did so

 

then there is twitter. Crowder himself got banned from twitter, after PAYING Twitter to write an ad they would approve for him, so that he new it was ok, he was then banned from twitter for that ad

 

Youtube comes out tomorrow and says we are a liberal company and will favor and boost liberal media, fine, they are taking claim. What they do now is claim they are nuetral

 

Prager may be a smart man, but his lawsuit was dismissed and your summary of it 'hey do not have to be fair and unbiased as long as they claim they are biased and unfair.' is not what the ruling stated.

 

Google defeats lawsuit claiming YouTube censors conservatives

 

 

But the judge said Google and YouTube, both units of Mountain View, California-based Alphabet Inc (GOOGL.O), did not qualify as “state actors” subject to the First Amendment by creating a “public forum” for speech.

 

“Defendants are private entities who created their own video-sharing social media website and make decisions about whether and how to regulate content that has been uploaded on that website,” Koh wrote.

 

ie...they never claimed to be fair and unbiased. They only claim to have rules, that they will enforce and that "which videos to restrict “may involve difficult, subjective judgment calls,” but said it should not be liable for trying to keep YouTube “safe and enjoyable for all users.”

 

As far as your other claims, trending, No code of conduct(I've agreed to their TOS, so I'm not sure what you are talking about) and Crowder getting banned from Twitter, I can't comment without seeing more information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fock Alex Jones, but have these entities banned any far left extremists? There has to be some who are just as bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mike. That lawsuit isnt over, it was dismissed at the lower courts, it is still on going

 

as far as COC

 

for example they have restricted Crowder's videos for cussing

 

yet I can find you 100's of rap videos saying much worse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fock Alex Jones, but have these entities banned any far left extremists? There has to be some who are just as bad.

 

Cenk Ungyr denies Armenian Genocide, and names his channel The Young Turks, which would be like me starting a channel called The Nazis

 

The Young Turks were the group of rebel Turkish who slaughtered 1.5 million Armenians in 1915

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Cenk Ungyr denies Armenian Genocide, and names his channel The Young Turks, which would be like me starting a channel called The Nazis

 

The Young Turks were the group of rebel Turkish who slaughtered 1.5 million Armenians in 1915

Didn't he flip out when someone brought that up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That's a reasonable assumption...a guy who promotes that Sandy Hook was a hoax, probably has sensible but tough immigration stances.

 

 

Haven't found examples yet.

Speaking of hoaxes, 99% of the MSM promotes a Russian collusion hoax on a daily basis.

 

Haven't heard about any of the social media outlets banning them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Washington (CNN) Donald Trump is heaping praise on a radio host who has asserted that the U.S. government was involved in the Oklahoma City bombing and the September 11 terrorist attacks.

=========================

"Your reputation is amazing. I will not let you down,"

=======================

 

Trump told Alex Jones during a Wednesday afternoon appearance on the Infowars.com proprietor's show.

 

Jones shared the love, telling Trump that "my audience, 90% of them, they support you."

 

Ever heard of Michael Moore?

 

He put out an award winning and highly regarded by the left movie claiming 9/11 was an inside job.

 

Alex Jones is the right wing version of Michael Moore. A nut who plays his shtick to make money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Ever heard of Michael Moore?

 

He put out an award winning and highly regarded by the left movie claiming 9/11 was an inside job.

 

Alex Jones is the right wing version of Michael Moore. A nut who plays his shtick to make money.

I would be inclined to agree with you if it weren't for the Sandy Hook stuff. Moore never pulled anything like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There appears to be a battle right now between L and R taking pieces off the board.

 

L takes Bill O'reilly, R takes Al Franken

 

L takes Roseanne, R takes Gunn

 

L takes Alex Jones, R takes?

 

 

Cenk, Maher, Scarborough?

 

I am going to put my money on Maher. He hates Muslims, throws around the N word live on TV, and likely has a closet full of #metoo victims.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

from what I have learned from following the lawsuit with Prager, and from Crowder's lawyer, they do not have to be fair and unbiased as long as they claim they are biased and unfair. What the argument is, is that you can't claim you are just a platform of free speech, then demonetize EVERY conservative person, while boosting views of liberals only. I believe Crowder in one thing I watch for example said they tracked their stuff for 7 straight days after it was posted where they received over 1 million views on a video yet never were on the trending list, meanwhile some video from Vox with 100k views is no 1 trending

 

the other issue with youtube at least is that they don't actually have a code of conduct, and when they give you a strike, they don't even tell you why they did so

 

then there is twitter. Crowder himself got banned from twitter, after PAYING Twitter to write an ad they would approve for him, so that he new it was ok, he was then banned from twitter for that ad

 

Youtube comes out tomorrow and says we are a liberal company and will favor and boost liberal media, fine, they are taking claim. What they do now is claim they are nuetral

It still shouldn't matter tho. If you are for a company being able to ban/refuse/deny service for any reason they see fit, then what difference does it make? Just because the say they're "fair" or "unbiased". Both of those terms can be subjective. What YouTube (which every employee at YouTube could lean left) might see as fair, people on the right might see as discrimination or censorship. Not to mention COC or TOS. Good luck with that lawsuit.

 

And for the record. Fock Alex Jones. He's a piece of human garbage. I wouldn't want him or his "left" equivalent on my site either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The internet and the media have a large portion of this country, the ignorant and confused, that there is an epidemic of police shooting and killing unarmed black men. There isn't. As a matter of fact, there isn't a shred of evidence to even hint at it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This probably deserves its own thread.

 

Liberal Asian: see that crazy biotch NYT hired who hates white people and tweeted about her hatred of white people on a consistent basis; left defends her hatred of whitey

 

Conservative Asian:

 

Running for Congress in CA. Facebook banned this ad because it contained content too “shocking, disrespectful or sensational” for the platform. I guess they don't want the world seeing what happens when a country goes full left.

 

Article about the Facebook ban:

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/heng-gets-facebook-blocked/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×