ADVERTISEMENT

It's over.

Yeah its always better to focus on a 25th amendment rather than the very 1st.

Media having the ability to openly oppose a sitting President and ban him from spreading propaganda and inciting violence is why the US is a free country

If this country didn’t respect free speech, Twitter would have to fall in line despite being a private business
 
I bet fat Rumps is losing his mind. He will go apeshit over this. Hahahaha!
 
Media having the ability to openly oppose a sitting President and ban him from spreading propaganda and inciting violence is why the US is a free country

If this country didn’t respect free speech, Twitter would have to fall in line despite being a private business
Someone who uses the word propaganda, sincerely supports free speech
 
Someone who uses the word propaganda, sincerely supports free speech

I am an ardent defender of free speech

But corporations like Twitter do have a right to self police their own platform that they own, just as you have a right to regulate speech on your property

Next you’ll say UGA Rivals is anti-free speech because they’ll ban you for posting their paywalled content on Twitter
 
I am an ardent defender of free speech

But corporations like Twitter do have a right to self police their own platform that they own, just as you have a right to regulate speech on your property

Next you’ll say UGA Rivals is anti-free speech because they’ll ban you for posting their paywalled content on Twitter
Many, many people who cite the 1st amendment don't understand the 1st amendment.
 
Media having the ability to openly oppose a sitting President and ban him from spreading propaganda and inciting violence is why the US is a free country

If this country didn’t respect free speech, Twitter would have to fall in line despite being a private business
Encouraging people to protest the election is not the same as inciting violence. Idc how you spin it. He has that right just as the left did when they wanted to “resist” his presidency and riot during his administration.

His ban and Apple’s threat to Parler is everything opposite of the first amendment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: George Hayduke
Encouraging people to protest the election is not the same as inciting violence. Idc how you spin it. He has that right just as the left did when they wanted to “resist” his presidency and riot during his administration.

His ban and Apple’s threat to Parler is everything opposite of the first amendment.

Do you have any idea what the first amendment protects? Clearly no, so I will tell you: it ensures the government cannot restrict speech. Go read the Bill of Rights for yourself and the extensive case law on this subject if you don’t believe me.

Are Apple and Twitter the government? The answer is no.

In foreign countries with problems with free speech, the problem they face is that the people are not free to openly disagree with the President and the government
 
Apple just told parlor either to implement a full moderation plan in 24 hours or face getting kicked off app store. Google will probably follow.
Yeah, they keep turning up the heat on this pressure cooker. We can only pray that the Supreme Court can stop the madness before this country explodes.
 
Yeah, they keep turning up the heat on this pressure cooker. We can only pray that the Supreme Court can stop the madness before this country explodes.

Uhm, what do you think SCOTUS is going to do tell private companies what they can and can not do with a platform they provide for free? That ain't happening the 1st amendment doesn't apply to this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: willdup
FB-IMG-1610156110444.jpg
 
Uhm, what do you think SCOTUS is going to do tell private companies what they can and can not do with a platform they provide for free? That ain't happening the 1st amendment doesn't apply to this.

they are censoring political and ideological speech and currently have protection under US law, political and ideological speech is the core of the first amendment
 
Uhm, what do you think SCOTUS is going to do tell private companies what they can and can not do with a platform they provide for free? That ain't happening the 1st amendment doesn't apply to this.
This is the modern day public square. They have a monopoly. There is an obvious case to be made.
 

This is stupid. He literally has a Press Secretary and an entire office devoted to making sure that he is able to communicate with the people. If he wanted, he could call a press conference and every news organization in the world would be there in under an hour. He's just to lazy to do it the old fashioned way.
 
This is the modern day public square. They have a monopoly. There is an obvious case to be made.
Wrong. I will say it again:
He literally has a Press Secretary and an entire office devoted to making sure that he is able to communicate with the people. If he wanted, he could call a press conference and every news organization in the world would be there in under an hour. He's just to lazy to do it the old fashioned way.
 
This is the modern day public square. They have a monopoly. There is an obvious case to be made.

SCOTUS is never going to tell a private corporation it can't moderate content on a platform it supplies for free..... Not a chance in hell. What's more if you repeal 230 you'll get even more censorship not less.
 
This is the modern day public square. They have a monopoly. There is an obvious case to be made.

Hardly... Apple is but one maker of many of cell phones, and even if you have an iPhone you also likely have other devices and computers in your home that you can access Parlor on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nice marmot
Wrong. I will say it again:
He literally has a Press Secretary and an entire office devoted to making sure that he is able to communicate with the people. If he wanted, he could call a press conference and every news organization in the world would be there in under an hour. He's just to lazy to do it the old fashioned way.
This isn’t about trump. This is about everyone on Twitter. People are constantly having their accounts suspended and it’s not for promoting violence or illegal acts. New York post is a prime example. Either you don’t understand the power they have or don’t care because for the time being you believe it doesn’t effect you.
 
This isn’t about trump. This is about everyone on Twitter. People are constantly having their accounts suspended and it’s not for promoting violence or illegal acts. New York post is a prime example. Either you don’t understand the power they have or don’t care because for the time being you believe it doesn’t effect you.
They publish their Terms of Service, and they are extraordinarily lenient in enforcing them. I am no big fan of Dorsey's, or Twitter, for the record.
 
  • Like
Reactions: willdup
I am an ardent defender of free speech

But corporations like Twitter do have a right to self police their own platform that they own, just as you have a right to regulate speech on your property

Next you’ll say UGA Rivals is anti-free speech because they’ll ban you for posting their paywalled content on Twitter

Yet twitter allows foreign dictators and terrorist to post their propaganda?
Call it for what it is Drew, this is suppression of conservatism. It's not just Trump, I have many friends that are being banned from Twitter and FB for posting conservative thought. Give me one example of Liberal thought that has been banned? I'll patiently await your reply.
 
Yet twitter allows foreign dictators and terrorist to post their propaganda?
Call it for what it is Drew, this is suppression of conservatism. It's not just Trump, I have many friends that are being banned from Twitter and FB for posting conservative thought. Give me one example of Liberal thought that has been banned? I'll patiently await your reply.

You have many friends banned? Whaaaaaaaaaat?

I know zero people. Zero.

Who are these people you are friends with?
 
Yet twitter allows foreign dictators and terrorist to post their propaganda?
Call it for what it is Drew, this is suppression of conservatism. It's not just Trump, I have many friends that are being banned from Twitter and FB for posting conservative thought. Give me one example of Liberal thought that has been banned? I'll patiently await your reply.
I would be sincerely interested to better understand the “conservative thought” your friends have been banned for.

You might be interested to know that many liberals think Facebook in particular leans conservative and has allowed pages of known extremist groups to remain up untouched. I guess it is all about perspective
 
  • Like
Reactions: celticdawg
You must not have any conservative friends.

on pretty much any given day for the past several years, if you pull the most popular/liked/retweeted items, 9 out of the top 10 will be political pundits, Trumpers, etc.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT