Posted on 10/11/2018 8:31:16 PM PDT by Theo
This will backfire on Facebook, and it won’t hurt Republicans one bit in the election.
I dont use it either but a huge number of people and businesses do. For many people, groups and businesses, social media is how they reach the world. It has become the public square.
When email and payment processing sites start censoring, and they are, it will affect so much that it is mind boggling.
My point is just that the internet is in a similar place at this point. It's early on in the evolution of businesses based on the internet, and there are going to have to be significant changes. I agree entirely with you that the public utility aspect of the internet has to be addressed. As it stands now, we have created an oligarchy of rich liberals who are positioned to control public discourse - at least for the short term. It must be fixed.
Facebook has become the public square for societal communications, same as Twitter. Whether we like it or not. They are the AT&T monopoly of today. These private companies utilize the public airwaves. When they restrict someone’s access to the public market in order to harm that person or business without cause, isn’t that the same as Microsoft gaining a monopoly and not allowing Netflix access? (I’m a non-techie and I’m describing that case as I remember it.) Why should conservative voices have to jump to a lesser-used minor platform that has not yet taken off. This is back of the bus stuff and it should be looked into.
They enticed a business to invest under false pretense, changed terms and financially impacted their income.
I'd call it fraud.
Time to file suits gainst the tech giants
>>>Facebook allows businesses to have more than one page, and we did own them and had them for years.<<<
There’s the first problem. It’s a facebook page on the website facebook.com. Facebook owns it, not you.
When you earn twice what you spend, spending $300k on Facebook ads seems pretty smart. Brian’s no dope.
Well said.
Bookmark for monitoring.
Think of it this way. Say you decide to start a business and you decide to advertise it in one place only, the NYT. Eventually, they decide not to run your ads anymore. Who’s to blame when you stop getting business? You, because you put all your eggs in one basket and it’s someone else’s basket.
>> Facebook allows businesses to have more than one page, and we did own them and had them for years. <<
That’s like saying you owned page 6 of the NYT. No one OWNS a page on facebook.com except for facebook. Even when you create a facebook page, you’re title is “Administrator” not Owner.
There’s a reason they say “word of mouth” is the best advertisement. It’s free and no other entity controls it.
If facebook went bankrupt and closed the site tomorrow, he’d be in the same boat.
He should have started moving his eggs out of that basket a year or two ago. It’s not like we didn’t know about who they are and what they think of us.
I’d been thinking about quitting facebook since the 2016 elections and finally did a few months ago. I canceled my personal account which canceled any services and apps of theirs that I used. I have a few websites and they had the ability to sign up and sign in with a facebook account. Very convenient as people don’t have to fill out a form with their email address, user name, password etc and then confirm their email address, to sign up. Just two clicks instead. I ditched it anyway.
People do have the ability to sign up/sign in to my sites with https://mewe.com however. Also reddit until they decide to delete the reddit.com/r/The_Donald sub reddit, then I’ll ditch them too.
I just lost one site. A photographer. She get’s plenty of work via facebook but not buying ads, word of mouth. She’s a rabid leftist anyway so I didn’t mind losing her and she fits right in with fb. They can have each other. She would have had to spend a few thousand $$s for me to get her site on the first page of a web search.
Just think of all the right leaning news sites. How did you find them? Word of mouth aka a link here on FR most likely. I’ve never seen townhall, breitbart etc advertised anywhere.
We can beat the new school by going old school. $300k in fb ads? Probably could have got some advertising air time on Rush or Hannity’s radio shows for that.
There are options..
They are not a monopoly. Just like Amazon isn’t. The biggest? yes. the only? no.
they are not required for anything.
I don’t see how they are a public utility. that is a far reach.
negative. I also have never owned any facebook stock.
bump
“Facebook, love um or hate um is still a private company.”
So are railroads.
In the 1870s they held a near monopoly on transportation in the US, much as Facebook and Twitter now enjoy a near monopoly on social media distribution through market power.
Rather than offer equal rates to all shippers, railroads were engaging in price discrimination and favoritism that threatened the survival of western farmers.
This situation ignited a grassroots voter rebellion organized around the Grange movement. The eventual result was the 1887 Interstate Commerce Act that compels railroads to offer the same rates to all prospective shippers. It was the first regulatory law and regulatory agency in American government.
Facebook, Twitter, Google aren’t publishers, they are social media backbones in the same fashion that railroads transportation backbones. They are abusing their position to act as censors in what has become the public’s main public square for political speech. They are going to end up being forced to offer equal access to all comers using the same legal reasoning that regulates RRs and Common Carriers.
Well, if you believe what is being said, he just lost 300K.
On Facebook.
That doesn't sound too swift.
No, you misunderstand. He spent $300k. But has earned over TWICE that amount, because of the $300k investment.
So why are we crying about him here?
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.