You can’t stop an idea.
Posted on 10/28/2018 8:59:45 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
Once known as the new frontier of free speech, the internet seemed destined to be one place on the planet where ideas could be freely expressed, and thoughts could be challenged in open debate. But no more. The unfiltered, Twitter-esque social media platform GAB – a messaging board where censorship does not rule – is about to be tossed to the wolves.
In the wake of the horrific mass murder at a Pittsburgh, PA, synagogue, the web hosting company that provided GAB’s platform has decided to pull the plug, claiming an unspecified “breach of the Joyent Terms of Service.” Given little more than one day of notice, GAB has until the morning of Monday, October 29, to relocate its entire operation to a new platform, with a new provider.
PayPal has also cut ties with GAB. A surprising move considering Facebook has in the past had users live stream actual murders on its platform, yet faced no backlash from the digital pay gateway.
Publishers The alleged killer at the Tree of Life Synagogue, Robert Bowers, had posted numerous anti-Semitic sentiments on his GAB feed. Being a company that advertises itself as a haven for free speech, censorship has only rarely reared its ugly head at GAB. Unlike the social media platform’s main competitor, Twitter – where censorship of content is ubiquitous – users are largely left to their own devices and are free to post whatever they please.
Joyent, GAB’s current web host, has taken a step that will have the delegates of political correctness exulting in faux righteousness. By moving to control what speech can and cannot be expressed via their hosting service, the company has become a publisher rather than just a provider of electronic space. This is the thin end of the wedge for companies that provide space for content creators; calls for Facebook, Google, and other tech monopolies to follow suit will soon be on the way.
Virtual Masters Yesterday it was Alex Jones, today it is GAB, tomorrow it will be any soul who dares to dream of a world where people can communicate freely.
Many people will be asking themselves: Didn’t Bowers have Facebook and Twitter accounts? And the answer is “yes.” So why is it that Internet Service Providers are not looking to shut down these online behemoths? Simply, because Google, Facebook, Twitter, et al., are their own hosts. These companies are so big that they do not rely on third parties to host their websites and are thus beholden only to themselves.
In the future, unless a company can afford the monumental expense of setting up its very own ISP, it will be subject to the whims and political leanings of its digital masters. This means that no start-up company will be free to operate without becoming a publisher, and being a publisher means you are open to legal action over the content you allow – a definition that will force all small operations to censor or go bust.
Digital Hypocrisy The Facebooks, Twitters, and Googles of this world fear no such repercussions. Indeed, anti-Semitic content has been widely viewed and shared on these major league social media platforms without a single action being taken. Prominent black nationalist and Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan has posted and reposted videos of himself stating, “I’m not an anti-Semite. I’m anti-termite,” receiving thousands of “likes” and retweets, all without restriction. Despite examples such as this, the voices who are celebrating GAB’s imminent demise have not called for Twitter to suffer the same fate.
As the nation’s tech giants gain more concentrated power and the country’s leaders await legislative proposals for regulation that may create a virtual monopoly, it is time to ask ourselves if this is the end of the internet as a stage for free speech.
Yesterday it was Alex Jones, today it is GAB, tomorrow it will be any soul who dares to dream of a world where people can communicate freely, express themselves openly, and live in a society where the legality of your own thoughts are not subject to political diktat or capricious whimsy.
You can’t stop an idea.
This site is more like a club, and in any case is not a system of mass communications reaching millions or more users. What might be tolerable for small sites, is not tolerable for large and significant sites.
I noticed John Robinson was expressing concern about this turn of events early on in this thread. I think they feel this censorship dragon is breathing down their neck too. Now we can all perish for some abstract theory about some potential danger we might face in the future, or we can take steps to stop it before we are unable to use public communications systems anymore.
It's time to put aside the sitzkreig and actually do something that might have a real result.
Who gets to decide when a site stops being a “club” and starts being a “system of mass communications”? Social media sites all have Terms of Service.
No I regard your constant need to belittle and attack as insults, because that’s what they are. You replied to me first bub, don’t whine that I pointed out your idea is bad and would drastically increase government control with zero gain.
This site presents itself as a conservative forum. It isn’t presented as the public square like FB or Twitter.
A local coffee shop also presents itself as a “public square”. Go in there and start loudly spouting racist rhetoric and see how long it takes them to ask you to leave.
It would seem to me that any system that has more than 10% market share ought to be forced to carry all traffic. We can quibble as to the proper percentage, but when you have millions of users, you are a big player.
Social media sites all have Terms of Service.
Don't care. Terms of service which violate law should be regarded as null and void. We just need to pass a law requiring them to carry traffic, or don't serve the public.
I thought about replying to a lot of your earlier comments, but I didn’t have the time when I first noticed them. When I finally got the time, I figured “Why waste it on him?”
When a local coffee shop routes millions of communications through it every day, then I will defend the right of racist to send their traffic through it too. Till then, small businesses ought to be able to do as they please.
noticed John Robinson was expressing concern about this turn of events early on in this thread. I think they feel this censorship dragon is breathing down their neck too.
...
It’s time to put aside the sitzkreig and actually do something that might have a real result.
We’re essentially back to email, phone, and word-of-mouth
for conservatives to communicate. Email and phone can be closed off just like the ISPs, hosting services, payment services, banking services, social network services, etc., etc.
I saw the beginnings of this back in the 1980s-90s, when commies were getting into IT management, and purging all the conservative men and women, first from management positions, then from the technical positions through outsourcing/offshoring. Nobody listened then.
NOW. Arguing is useless. The communists have unregulated control of our communications, our payment processing, our banking, our ability to survive as a society of free citizens, without their detailed dictation on the terms of our existence. What to do?
Lots of conservatives are going to reject "there oughta be a law against that", but that is where we are.
Communists have all the big money. Communists control all the corporate BODs and executive suites. Communists control all the big tech outfits. Communists control all the banking. Commies control all the Human Resources departments. Commies control all the colleges and universities.
Currently, conservatives have a small majority politically. That is the only advantage we have, and that can go away as soon as next Tuesday.
We can push for regulation to ensure our survival. Or we can continue to watch the screws tighten until we die or start fighting for real.
Very much so for those of us who can see what is happening.
What to do?
Other than using the hammer of government to break these monopolies, I don't know. We can try to build our own networks, but it's doubtful that much of significance can be stood up in time to do anything against the Juggernaut.
But yes, we should be trying to build our own networks/server farms/cable infrastructure.
Yup.
Big Tech's Biggest Dilemma... JustInformed Talk - Oct 29, 2018
Especially because you can’t be bothered with facts and only go for insults. You are wrong. You are useless. And you are pathetic.
And you are about like I remember.
A coffee shop is private property.
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.