Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Criminal Facebook Corporation Shut Down Gateway Pundit Today Because of Our Conservative Beliefs
GATEWAY PUNDIT ^ | 3/3/2018 | Jim Hoft

Posted on 03/04/2018 8:26:18 AM PST by bitt

The Gateway Pundit (TGP) reached a record number of page views in 2017.

TGP readership hit an all-time high in 2017!

We reached more than 224 million page views in 2017. This surpassed our previous record from 2016 of 182 million page views.

We thank all our readers for all their support.

This Was Despite Unprecedented Attacks–

On the other hand, 2017 was a very challenging year for TGP. Facebook and Twitter have often altered their platforms to prevent TGP stories from being shared. They have employed far left operatives who deem which stories are acceptable and others they kill off before they go viral.

Stories like ‘Hillary is going to win in a landslide’, ‘Hillary is not sick’ or ‘Trump colluded with Russia’ are considered accurate reports. These powerful tech firms act as gatekeepers and prevent conservative content from being shared online.

In 2016 we were one of the few conservative sites that supported candidate Trump – along with Breitbart, The Drudge Report, Infowars, Zero Hedge and Conservative Treehouse. We are proud of our efforts to report the truth that led to Trump’s historic win.

In 2017 Harvard and Columbia Journalism Review found that The Gateway Pundit was the 4th most influential conservative news source in the 2016 election.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Extended News; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: facebook; gatewaypundit; gaywayplungeit; hoft; internet; liberalfascism; newmedia; tgp
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-56 next last
To: bitt

Facebook/Google/Amazon MUST BE de monopolized.

21 posted on 03/04/2018 9:27:01 AM PST by freedomjusticeruleoflaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks; Sparticus; Mears

Yes, I kind of gleaned that since the GP “writers” couldn’t be bothered to convey that. :-)

I suggest that if the GP writers are ever abducted by aliens, they let the aliens write the ransom note. The GP writers are bound to go off on some brainless tangent and waste their excerpt on some pointless drivel rather than who, what and which direction they are going.

22 posted on 03/04/2018 9:27:46 AM PST by Larry Lucido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Hostage

When they are listed on the Stock Exchange, aren’t they considered public?

23 posted on 03/04/2018 9:28:09 AM PST by Bikkuri
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

My post WAS about Facebook.


24 posted on 03/04/2018 9:40:00 AM PST by Mears
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

“According to Q, a Class Action Lawsuit could be in the future”

Has anything that Q said was going to happen actually happened?

25 posted on 03/04/2018 9:45:40 AM PST by gibsonguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Sidebar Moderator

“Sue The Crap” may be the better option. It may even fall under Interstate Commerce.

26 posted on 03/04/2018 9:46:53 AM PST by DaxtonBrown
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: DaxtonBrown

Good point.

27 posted on 03/04/2018 9:47:27 AM PST by Sidebar Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

Posts can disappear very quickly on the public timeline. Posts can seem to appear on your site but ‘do they really’ ??

Who knows who can see posts FB don’t like?

There needs to be a new Conservative site with Conservative operators.
Turn about fair play!

28 posted on 03/04/2018 9:47:30 AM PST by TribalPrincess2U (0bama's agenda�Divide and conquer seems to be working.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Bikkuri

Not sure what you are driving at...
Yes they are publicly traded stock.

29 posted on 03/04/2018 9:51:27 AM PST by Freedom56v2 (#KATE'SWALL Build it Now)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: bitt

It seems even individual FR post, when you do a search, use to come up a lot more than in recent years?

30 posted on 03/04/2018 9:58:29 AM PST by Leep (The dims better watch it..Trump is CRAZY!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mears

It’s their Facebook page - in other words Facebook is throttling their presence in Facebook. Gateway Pundits own independent site is OK.

31 posted on 03/04/2018 9:58:29 AM PST by aquila48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: TribalPrincess2U

I noticed on my phone facebook comments are there, when i logged in on a desktop computer i had notifications that my comments on my friends pages had been marked as spam, and i noticed that the comment count doesn’t always match how many comments are there.

32 posted on 03/04/2018 10:05:33 AM PST by edzo4 (Thank Q very much!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Sparticus


And this can be difficult to vet out because even if you Share and then go look at several of your Friends’ Feeds, you aren’t going to see the same view of it as they do. Feed content is actively changed — you can’t even get the same view of your own feed twice in a row.

Try it.

Hit “Home”, select “Most Recent”

You should see everything posted to your feed in chrono order starting with the newest.

Scroll down a ways, then hit “Home” again,a nd again select “Most Recent”.

As you’d expect, there’ll be new stuff at the top, but the content that was there before — it won’t be identical as you scroll down; there may be “Sponsored” content there that wasn’t there before, and some things that were shared to you that were there before, might not be there the second time through.

33 posted on 03/04/2018 10:51:59 AM PST by HKMk23 (You ask how to fight an idea? Well, I'll tell you how: with another idea!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Freedom56v2

What I meant, was if it is public.. isn’t it illegal to show bias like that?

34 posted on 03/04/2018 11:11:18 AM PST by Bikkuri
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Sparticus

You’re right - you’ve got the facts down cold...

Gateway Pundit is too close to the issue...they needed to explain it better. If some of our people don’t
‘get it’... then liberals reading it won’t understand at all...

35 posted on 03/04/2018 11:11:43 AM PST by GOPJ (Mexican illegals compromise our elections WITH HELP FROM DEMOCRATS, not Russians.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: bitt

Hey I don’t like how Facebook treats conservatives BUT it is their Playground so you play by their rules.

36 posted on 03/04/2018 11:12:58 AM PST by Mad Dawgg (If you're going to deny my 1st Amendment rights then I must proceed to the 2nd one...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bikkuri

Public function doctrine is a legal principle that states that in a suit filed under 42 USCS § 1983 (Civil action for deprivation of rights), a private person’s actions constitute state action if the private person performs functions that are traditionally reserved to the state.

The public-function doctrine requires that the private actor exercise “a power ‘traditionally exclusively reserved to the State. [Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co., 500 U.S. 614, 640 (U.S. 1991)]

Under the “public function” doctrine, in the context of “under color of state law” for purposes of 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983, certain functions are regarded as the sole province of government, and ostensibly private parties performing such functions have been treated as state actors. The classic cases are the conduct of elections, and the governance of a “company” town. The public function test is based on historical practice, as opposed to a normative judgment. It is not enough that the function be one sometimes performed by government. Rather, where the party complained of is otherwise private, the function must be one exclusively reserved to the state. [Logiodice v. Trs. of Me. Cent. Inst., 296 F.3d 22 (1st Cir. Me. 2002)]

37 posted on 03/04/2018 11:52:17 AM PST by SgtHooper (If you remember the 60's, YOU WEREN'T THERE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: SgtHooper

Unfortunately, I do not see these bigtime liberal ratholes performing a public function.

38 posted on 03/04/2018 11:54:01 AM PST by SgtHooper (If you remember the 60's, YOU WEREN'T THERE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: bitt


39 posted on 03/04/2018 11:58:57 AM PST by Albion Wilde (We're even doing the right thing for them. They just don't know it yet. --Donald Trump, CPAC '18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sparticus
I read the article over at GP.

The BIG issue contractually for Facebook is about charging money to GP for advertisements. If FB refuses to deliver services promised in their advertising contract, then GP has 2 remedies: stop paying for advertising on FB and/or take FB to Court for fraud.

It is a contractual dispute. As long as GP voluntarily uses the services of FB, a private corporation, this is not a case of censorship.

40 posted on 03/04/2018 12:04:11 PM PST by The Westerner (Protect the most vulnerable: get the government out of medicine and education.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-56 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson