Skip to comments.Criminal Facebook Corporation Shut Down Gateway Pundit Today Because of Our Conservative Beliefs
Posted on 03/04/2018 8:26:18 AM PST by bitt
click here to read article
Facebook/Google/Amazon MUST BE de monopolized.
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.
When they are listed on the Stock Exchange, aren’t they considered public?
My post WAS about Facebook.
“According to Q, a Class Action Lawsuit could be in the future”
Has anything that Q said was going to happen actually happened?
“Sue The Crap” may be the better option. It may even fall under Interstate Commerce.
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!
Not sure what you are driving at...
Yes they are publicly traded stock.
It seems even individual FR post, when you do a search, use to come up a lot more than in recent years?
It’s their Facebook page - in other words Facebook is throttling their presence in Facebook. Gateway Pundits own independent site is OK.
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.
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.
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.
What I meant, was if it is public.. isn’t it illegal to show bias like that?
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...
Hey I don’t like how Facebook treats conservatives BUT it is their Playground so you play by their rules.
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)]
Unfortunately, I do not see these bigtime liberal ratholes performing a public function.
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.
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.