Posted on 05/27/2019 11:40:25 AM PDT by Kaslin
Social media companies, whose base of operations are on the Left Coast and operated by staff who are almost universally left wing, are squeezing conservatives. There have been some pretty glaring examples of bias, specifically the whole notion being accounts being suspended on Twitter for entirely arbitrary reasons. Yes, Facebook banned Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam for his long history of bigoted remarks, like calling Jewish people termites, but his account wasn’t suspended on Twitter. Oh, and even without using examples of bias, Twitter itself admits that the environment is so left wing that conservative employees cannot speak up without fear. Still, while the tech giants of Silicon Valley are very, very…veryliberal, they still like making money. Hence, why Facebook has dedicated staffs to serve its conservative and liberal clientele. Despite conservatives being cracked down harder than liberal users, Twitter still knows that they need Right America to stay engaged on their platform.
Whether we like it or not, social media is where business, political, and cultural news spread and intersect. Many have called it a cancer on society. They may be right, but they’re here to stay for now—and debates circling the issues that we face as a nation are shared on these platforms. Still, that doesn’t mean that some on the Hill view the ever-increasing power of social media companies as a problem. There has been talk about regulating these companies, breaking them up, or doing away with them altogether. One Republican Senator, Josh Hawley (R-AR), says that these companies have done more harm than good, that they’re dabbling in the “addiction economy,” and that they should more or less be eradicated. Hawley made these claims in an op-ed for USA Today last week. Vice added the impact social media is still in its infancy, but added that the basis for Hawley’s criticism of the social media giants isn’t without merit. Making them go away probably isn’t realistic, but breaking them up could be an option (via Vice):
A Republican senator who works on antitrust says that social media, including Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter, have done more harm than good and they should “disappear.”
[…]
“Social media’s innovations do our country more harm than good. Maybe social media is best understood as a parasite on productive investment, on meaningful relationships, on a healthy society,” he wrote. “Maybe we’d be better off if Facebook disappeared.”
[…]
Some lawmakers asked Zuckerberg why Facebook shouldn’t be broken up, but, for the most part, Zuckerberg has gotten off easy by pitching himself as living the quintessential American dream: From humble beginnings in a Harvard dorm room, a college dropout made an all-American company that has connected the world and created many thousands of high-paying jobs.
Hawley called out those lofty claims in his op-ed: “Ask the social giants what it is they produce for America and you’ll hear grand statements about human interaction,” he wrote. But “Facebook, Twitter, Instagram—they devote massive amounts of money and the best years of some of the nation’s brightest minds to developing new schemes to hijack their users’ neural circuitry.
[…]
“High salaries and stock options have encouraged a generation of our brightest engineers to enter a field of little productive value. This is, to put it mildly, an opportunity missed for the nation,” Hawley wrote. “What marvels might these bright minds have produced had they been oriented toward the common good?”
Hawley’s argument is persuasive, but there is, of course, no way to magically make social media disappear. Considering that he’s on the subcommittee on antitrust, competition policy, and consumer rights, breaking the social media giants up might be the next best choice.
What say you?
>>>International communication on the internet
So you are saying all international communication on the internet is controlled by Facebook? I think you are overestimating its reach.
We've already been regulated by the Federal government, unlike FascistBook and Twatter.
So, I would tend to disagree.
I've been on Twatter since October 2016, and I was never dumb enough to give Head Fascist Zuckerberg my personal info and inner thoughts. ;-)
Disagree with what? I’m confused. :)
Did you rebel against the "tyranny" of government regulation of AT&T and IBM?
These "Tech Lords" are seriously wealthy people in control of the major social media companies, marching in goose-stepping unison to try to fix the 2020 election.
They plotted to do this since the day after the 2016 election.
It has been a large, industry-wide conspiracy two+ years in the making, starting with Silicon Valley biggie Dave McClure's public rant at a giant international tech conference in Spain the day after the 2016 election.
It's chilling to watch, in retrospect.
We can see that the conspiracy worked, after November 6. And the open sedition is ongoing...
McClure: "We [Silicon Valley] provide communications platforms for the rest of the country, and we are allowing s**t to happen..."
"...It's our duty and our responsibility as entrepreneurs, as citizens of the f**king world, to make sure that s**t does not happen [people like Trump taking office]..."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVTVf7ffShg
McClure is a rich POS, even though you've never heard of him. His fellow-traveling Commie buds in the Valley have, though.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_McClure
Dave McClure is an entrepreneur and angel investor based in the San Francisco Bay Area, who founded the business accelerator 500 Startups, serving as CEO until his resignation in 2017.
By the way - these Nazis don't give a rip if you or I know about it, either - because we're "po' folk", and can't do anything to stop them...
As I said, we've already been regulated by the Feds. :-)
Please post an online definition of social media
and show me how FR differs. Thanks.
need to turn them into utilites.
Unconstitutional federal acts are tyranny regardless of who "rebels" against them.
seriously wealthy people
The leftist government always goes after "seriously wealthy people" because they can't stand anyone to be wealthy but them. The federal government OWNS greed. It is what they do.
You are ignoring the 800 lb gorilla in the room: the 80%+ unconstitutional portion for the $4 trillion government which, as Trump so accurately said, is coming for you.
Private "seriously wealthy" businessmen can't put you in jail or execute you - but government tyrants will - at the drop of a hat.
Get straight on who your REAL enemy is.
Do you need help googling ‘social media?’
I can do it if you prefer, but it would
be better for you to discover it yourself.
What are you so afraid of?
Interaction with a cloistered mind like yours does me no good, so there is that.
You’re the one with the closed mind,
afraid to deal with facts. Must suck
to be so fearful. Bless your heart.
Now, THAT'S amusing... ;-)
That’s right. Government will get on their payroll as is convenient for the government.
But the tyranny of the mostly unconstitutional federal government is about taking ALL they can from you - your money, your freedom, and your very life.
Private enterprise and the “seriously wealthy” private entrepreneurs can’t do that - but government tyranny can - AND WILL.
Again, get straight on who your enemy REALLY is.
I wonder how much money the post office lost once America Online stopped sending upgrade CD’s?
They are publicly-traded corporations (not private companies), in violation of their obligation to operate as “open platforms” in exchange for their Federal protection from content liability - per the Communications Decency Act of 1996 Section 230.
Those regulations are on the books - whether you like it or not. The cookie-cutter conservatives like you ignore the rule of law when it does not suit you.
If you want them free from all restraint, then become a lobbyist to have the SEC dissolved, and have the CDA repealed.
Otherwise, act like an adult and stop metaphorically screaming about this.
The Federal government already has the regulatory power over them: Remove their content liability, and allow any and all private citizens to sue them for corporate malfeasance (compromising stock value through politically-motivated scandal) and consumer fraud (selective and deceptive enforcement of terms of service, a legal contract).
I don’t do any of that stuff....only e-mail.
Section 230.
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.