Posted on 06/29/2020 4:45:37 PM PDT by janetjanet998
Bill Mitchell @mitchellvii YouTube just banned Stefan Molyneux.
A million followers.
Hundreds of millions of views.
No warning given.
Gone.
WHEN will Congress do something about this?
“They’re using someone else’s private property”
—
I don’t know anyone who has trouble getting to Youtube. NO guard dog last I checked - using several browsers.
“they’re using it at the property owner’s pleasure”
—
Nope - they are in a legal business relationship where they supply content and Youtube pays them. As long as they provide content, Youtube has to keep up it’s end of the bargain.
Now, if Youtube can demonstrate in a court of law that they’re silencing an equal or greater amount of users for being Democrats, more power to them. But, facing that task, I suspect they would fold faster than CNN when it realized settling for many millions with the Covington kid was a less costly choice.
Everyone is always doing something illegal.
When it comes to big corporations, that is more true than with individuals.
If you haven’t figured that out by now you’re pretty dense.
The Left has cetainly figured it out. Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime. A corrolary is “Show me the corporation and I’ll show you the crime”. They’ve been in fear of the political Left for decades it’s time they they become afreaid of the political Right.
If that's the case Stefan can sue them and win damages.
What's the problem?
As Twitter Users Bail, Media Predictably Starts Attacking Parler
Eye-Popping 500k Users Flock to Twitter Competitor After Twitter Shuts Down Pro-Trump Accounts
The Left has certainly figured it out. Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime. A corollary is “Show me the corporation and I’ll show you the crime”. They’ve been in fear of the political Left for decades it’s time they they become afreaid of the political Right.
The Age of Trump has shown us there is no functioning “political right.” Progressives and their corportist allies firmly control both parties. Until there is an opposition party to the progressive corporist agenda nothing will change.
The Left has dropped any pretext of being loyal to this country or individual rights. Now they just want everyone to unconditionally surrender and obey their every order. The Left is evil, authoritarian, and we must do whatever is needed to stop it from conquering this country.
“And what else does in say in their terms of service about their control of what they think is appropriate content?”
—
This is where you get to address another area - define “appropiate” (not you, Youtube or whatever). It’s not “appropriate” to be a member of or support a political party? Or to say there is a difference between male and female, it’s basic biology?
Also, if a social media is working to promote or attack a candidate or party, shouldn’t they register as such (in effect & deed a pac) and be subject to all the related laws and requirements?
“Both sides benefit as long as both sides play by the rules, but the fact is the YouTube platform is private property and they control what gets carried.”
—
This is where the social should be anti-trusted and broken up or forego any special legal civil protection (and, in fact, be even more regulated as social control systems and/or PACs).
The breakup of Ma Bell brought a revolution in the economy, business and technology, so perhaps something good may even come of it.
So lets understand how far your belief goes. Should laws which require landlords to rent to people without consideration of their race or religion be repealed?
The Age of Trump has shown us there is no functioning “political right.” Progressives and their corportist allies firmly control both parties. Until there is an opposition party to the progressive corporist agenda nothing will change.
_____________________________________________________
This unfortunately is true. This is why foreign aggression/wars need to be excoriated by real conservatives too. The corporate Left us the sons and daughters of our citizens (as well as tax-payer money) to spread Leftism around the globe. Until the political Left is culled. No American citizen should be dying to spread globalist influence around the Earth.
It's happened.
I am not a lawyer arguing what the law currently says. I am giving reasons why I think the law should be different.
My reasons for wanting the laws to be different is not from my ass, but from an argument about what is fair, just, and reasonable.
You may certainly argue why the kind of change in the law I advocate is not fair, but just challenging me to demonstrate that it is currently the law misses my point.
Not regulate. Prevent regulation. Censorship needs to be hammered hard with government power. I would rather see all tech companies burned to the ground then allowed to control speech in America.
We are all on the defensive and it shouldn't be that way. For those of us who survived the 1960s and remember it, all the speech codes, official censorship and disinviting certain individuals from planned appearances at (mostly state-supported) colleges and universities represents a 180-degree shift on the part of left-wing activists who were then clamoring for "free speech" to denounce this country's military venture in Viet-Nam.
Members of Congress, to my knowledge, still have blanket immunity for anything they say on the floor of Congress. They can make things up, tell out-and-out lies, slander their opponents, constituents and the President with zero proof and have no fear of prosecution.
Publishers must always worry about lawsuits, as should authors. It is a very litigious age we are in. It doesn't appear to be getting any better.
I'd like to say that YouTube--regardless of who "owns" it--should have the authority to allow or disallow certain content, just as Jim Robinson can and does limit what FReepers may post here.
True, one's a business and the other less so (until Jim get a bee in his bonnet and takes advertising on FreeRepublic--let's hope not!).
In either case, however, certain standards must be maintained to protect the owners and users from lawsuits and (worst case, but it could happen here just as it has in other "democracies" such as neighboring Canada) government seizure of facilities, files and product, along with criminal charges arising from "hate speech" and its close cousins as interpreted by certain gummint authorities whose livelihood relies on expanding the penumbra surrounding such.
And, of course there are a great many private, tax-exempt,organizations on the prowl for evil-doers. If they don't have the manpower (oh, excuse my sexist slip--that would be "human resources"--sorry!) to bring the cretins to justice themselves, they have no compunction about publishing slanderous complaints and forwarding them to their supporters to stir the pot and maybe rake in some guilt bucks.
We've seen this type of fund-raising before. What is especially irritating, though, is when a self-described "civil rights" group achieves status as whistle-blower among local, state and federal law-enforcement agencies.
I have in mind the SPLC as Example #1. Here is how they define Stefan Molyneux on their web site:
A libertarian internet commentator and alleged cult leader who amplifies "scientific racism," eugenics and white supremacism to a massive new audience, Stefan Molyneux operates within the racist so-called “alt-right” and pro-Trump ranks.Now, I am not a hard-core fan of Dr. Molyneux having watched just one of his YouTube commentaries several years back. But I did on occasion read some of his articles in Liberty, in the late '90s, and found his writing stimulating.
Attitudes change over time, of course. I was a long-time subscriber to National Review until Buckley and his wrecking crew came down hard on Joe Sobran and Patrick Buchanan. Frank Meyer must be rolling in his grave.)
I suspect there will be another opportunity for Mr. Molyneux just as there was for Alex Jones and others who are currently unknown to the masses.
We need to remove obstacles to free discussion, though. I'm afraid we are seeing just the tip of the iceberg in the present case.
How cute. You think this is a free market. Ha ha ha ha ha...
You should read up on what the "free market" did to Gab, among others.
I think we all do, but you are fooling yourself if you think this is a "free market."
Youtube is effectively a monopoly and it needs to be treated like a telephone company.
Stop comparing Youtube to Free Republic. This is like comparing lightning to a lightning bug. It just looks foolish.
“Congress did that to allow platforms to delete obscene material, mainly pornography. “
Utterly laughable. The internet is saturated with free porn. The legal protection was meant so that someone could not sue Google for harmful things their servers routed people to, as in things that would otherwise be torts.
Verizon cannot be sued because a person makes a threatening phone call or text to someone. THAT is the intent for tech protection.
Newspapers and other media does not get this protection. If they allow a letter to the editor, or a classified ad slandering or defaming, they can and will be sued. The example of this is the Covington boys.
Websites could easily remove porn without legal protection even with them assuming editorial control. I don’t see a lot of porn on the commercials for FOX news or in the local newspaper. Somehow they manage to get by just fine.
But keep pretending you are conservative sport.
This is just what the Nazis did. You need to wake up. Go study a little history leading up to Kristallnacht.
It’s time to break up Google. It’s too big and it’s harming the public interest; antitrust laws exist for a reason, they just need to be exercised.
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.