Alex Jones and corporate censorship

We would have to know how to determine how "strong" the instinct to survive as "content". But if there is no place to discuss it without censorship and interference, we face extinction.

 

Sure, but I didn't say that he is insane, I said that he is deluded. Wouldn't you agree?

 

Yes, you did.

I think he's deluded enough to think others will always buy his BS, but I also think he's sane enough to milk this "character" for as long as possible. In many ways, he's just a nuttier offshoot of Glenn Beck...and just as rich.

 

If he "broke the rules," why did this come immediately after numerous Democrats in congressional testimony grilling social media executives demand something be done about Jones in specific? And on top of that, CNN piled on as well.

Jones did't "break the rules," he pissed off powerful people by calling them out.

 

It's obvious he is. I think some of it is genuine political commentary, but other parts are clearly him hamming it up, saying outrageous ****, and trying to hawk pills.

 

Got to remember that Jones wasn't a stationary target. He was putting out new crap every day. Maybe his camel's back-breaking offenses were just that recent.

 

Given that you were talking about him being "sane enough to be held criminally and civilly responsible for his actions" you seemed to be under the impression that I called him CLINICALLY insane! I hardly think that talking about someone as having a "crazy mind" is the same as calling them clinically insane!

 

This guy is full of **** - the tactics of Jones he's describing fit the SPLC who just had to pay out several millions in a court case involving a target of their libel, and since that payout about 60 more individuals are considering filing suit against the SPLC as well.

This ban happened right after Congressional Democrats ripped social media in congressional testimony specifically singling out Alex Jones, demanding something "be done," and immediately thereafter liberal media such as CNN jumped on the bandwagon and piled on.

In light of this, there should be considerable public alarm that public officials are abusing their governmental power to pressure corporations into speech codes on their personal liking and to ban people on their specific demand. The inherent danger in that is unspeakable and we have horrible historical precedents for it. But alas, liberals show themselves as spoon-fed herd animals again and quietly swallow what the vanguard tells them like good little boys and girls.

 

No, this all happened immediately after Congressional Democrats demanded that social media executives in their testimonies "do something" about Alex Jones, in specific. It was political bullying by Democrat members of Congress. That's a horrifying precedent with regard to civil liberties.

 

Apple is china’s bitch

 

So you say, but he did break the rules.

 

Oh yeah. Lots of US corporations are now, because there's a hell of a lot of money for them in China today.

 

Apple products are made in china

Whatever china wants Apple has to comply

Apple is tayloring their software to the communist dictatorship requirements

 

Just how widespread do you suppose that sexual abuse is among Protestant churches (and there are many)?

You do make a good point, however, as concerning the doctrine of celibacy in the Catholic Church: It is quite likely to lead to an outlet that is not socially acceptable (to phrase it as mildly as possible).

 

Technically, you are correct: This does not meet the legal definition of censorship, since it apparently was not the doing of the government.

But for Facebook, YouTube, Apple, Spotify, and Twitter--among others--to all ban Alex Jones at the same time does seem like more than a coincidence...

 

True

We have had very stupid trade policies that trump is trying to fix

 

Violating the TOS of any internet service is grounds for banning; either permanent or temporary. Jones did this.

Violating FCC rules by running a pirate radio station is grounds for shutting it down. Jones did this.

What rules are you claiming Jones didn't break?

 

Thats an odd way of putting it

Why dont you reveal what rules jones broke?

 

When selling a big lie, such as the Sandy Hook conspiracy theory, it's important to always include actual facts. That said, if a person is lying to you in order to sell their POV, they can't be trusted since it's not always possible to tell when they are lying or not. Jones is a liar selling fantasies to gullible idiots. He can't be trusted.

 

Your are free to clarify your claims, but when you claim to have never called him insane, when, in fact, you did with your "crazy mind" post, expect to be called on it.

 

You should read the posts before rushing to reply. I was quoting Empress. Ask her like I did.

 

She should tell you jones didnt break any rules that we know of

 

Who is "we"?

First, I support private companies being able to pick and choose their clientele. Left and Right Wing authoritarians disagree and seek to dictate who can be served and who cannot be to private business owners.

Second,@Empress is free to make all the claims she likes regardless if they are substantiated or not. Same goes for all of us. That said, I think posters who back up their claims with logic and reputable sources will gain more respect than those who are simply highly emotional and tend to type in all caps.

Now for some facts: https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-...fowars-alex-jones-was-banned-apple-facebook-/
Over the course of 24 hours, most social media giants kicked one of the most infamous conspiracy theory peddlers off their platforms.

Alex Jones, the creator of the Infowars website and multiple talk shows, has had a hand in spreading hoaxes online, including unproven theories that the Sandy Hook massacre was fabricated, and that Democrats ran a child abuse-ring out of a pizzeria.

But that’s not why he was banned from these platforms on Aug. 5 and 6....

...What sparked their removal? The idea is similar throughout: Jones violated the social media platforms’ hate speech policies.

Facebook defines hate speech as "a direct attack on people based on what we call protected characteristics — race, ethnicity, national origin, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, caste, sex, gender, gender identity, and serious disease or disability. We also provide some protections for immigration status. We define attack as violent or dehumanizing speech, statements of inferiority, or calls for exclusion or segregation." Youtube has a similar definition. Apple does not define hate, but writes that content may be removed or rejected if it could be construed as racist, misogynist, or homophobic, or depicts hate themes.

Like this forum, a person who continually violates the rules, once or despite multiple warnings, can be banned. We all digitally signed the TOS when we registered. Jones did the same for each of the platforms from which he was banned.

 

Facebook “standards” are so vague and broad its merely how the lib censors feel on any given day

For the record I dont think Sandyhook was a hoax

And I wonder why liberals are so insecure that they fear anyone who does think its a hoax

 

Then my advice is to not post on Facebook. You know you don't have a "right" to be a member of FB, don't you?

Good. Common ground.

I don't know but I suspect it's human nature and the exact same reason conservatives are so insecure they fear anyone who disagrees with them.