Lets focus here what is really going on with the RIGHT and push for censorship.

Ok I get the left has gone full bonkers so no need to rehash the obvious. Also I get the MSM , Tech Oligarch, and billionaires are all biased towards the left and purposely hide, ignore, and block pro right leaning stories and information. Again its obvious and if you dont see it then it would be like trying to have a discussion with a rock.

However, with all this going on with the Biden , the left, and twitter blocking content it worries me that the right is pushing for things that can be used for censorship but at even greater consequences.

Now they are pushing to undo Section 230 . Why? why isnt the right letting the consumer dictate the market and using the market to address the rampant bias from the left?

There are alternative sites to twitter why isn't trump using them? sure they aren't as popular but if trump moved to such site it would become even more popular. Heck better yet why isn't someone with the cash taking advantage of the Social media hate and starting their own site and putting some serious cash to promoting it?

My problem with the republicans is that they are fixing the short term problem with long term consequences and it makes no sense what they are proposing when you start looking into it. In essence the Right is promoting censorship as well.


For example
the republicans are all up in arms about twitter,fb,instagram, and other online mediums censoring republican favored information as they should be.

However, the same republicans basically gave the ISP full control to censor ALL content down the road by undoing net neutrality.

The long term consequence is the following.

Today twitter pisses you off with their bias. However TODAY you have the option to go to other sites such as ATS to interact with,speak your mind, and get others opinion. TODAY you even have the option to start your own website or social media platform.

LONG TERM with net neutrality gone and completely being enforced you wont have those options. You wont be able to go to other sites, you wont be able to start your own website or social media on the internet, because the ISP can legally restrict access to any sites they care to. Like Verizon did to NETFLIX about 5 or more years ago when net neutrality was first repealed.

Verizon told netflix , hey give us some money or we will slow traffic to your site . Sure enough Netflix first told them to F off . Then verizon PURPOSELY slowed traffic to all their customers making netflix unusable, enough so that netflix actually paid verizon the money and the traffic flowed once again as normal.

Do republicans honestly think that the deepstate ( or insert name here) wont use the repeal of net neutrality to censor content online like social media and the MSM is doing today?

Now you have the republicans pushing for the draconian solution once again with huge potential to bite us in the arse in the long run as well , with repealing section 230. Do republicans honestly think that repealing 230 wont be used by the deepstate ( or insert name here) to intimated content providers and force them to comply with their narrative?

Like I said the left has gone bonkers no need to even rehash that IMO. However, the game i see being played is one we have seen before on how the two party system uses distractions to herd the masses into regulations that have serious long term consequences. By the time many realize those consequences it will be to late to do anything about it.


The answer is definitely not supporting the left or voting for biden so I'm not suggesting that, but Proceed with caution.

The enemy of your enemy is not necessarily your friend .

IMO I think trump is being played as a patsy and has no understanding of the technologies at play or the long term consequences of what he is doing. the alternative is that he is on it.


They have most of the tools to completely censor the internet now and once they do it will be to late. The internet was what allowed us to expose the rampant corruption ,work , coordinate,fight back against disinfo, fight back against the propoganda, fight back against the narrative, and communicate with each other on a global scale. The consequence are so bad that the ISP aren't even using the repeal of net neutrality yet to their advantage, despite paying billions to undo it. If they did took advantage of the repeal of net neutrality today the backlash would be tp great. Its standard Machiavellian tactics. They have to do it very slowly and over a period of time to decrease the revolt and backlash of the people. I assume once trump is gone we might start feeling some of this backlash.

I don't know what the answer is, but pretending the spoiled food we are being given and eating doesn't smell bad doesn't help either.

The only way I see out of this and escaping the incoming future of a 1984 society we are being hoarded too, is an impossibility. We would have to drop our political parties loyalty and come together as one to stand up to BOTH party, MSM, and established Oligarchs.

You're missing something important - those platforms have MAJOR influence over a large percent of the voters because they have been sucked into the mindset of social media is life. We are seeing a huge problem with Twitter, Facebook and Google because they are not letting the market determine their outcome, they are controlling the market. That is not healthy.

lol
they are all in on it.

the moneylenders own the world.
the moneylenders own the media.
the moneylenders own the lobbbyists.
the moneylenders own the gov'ment.

the reason nothing changes is, because we are living under moneylender iron fisted rule.
they just want war, taxes, death, and murder for the cattle.

we are the cattle.
thats what they call us no less.
cattle.

originally posted by: HalWesten
You're missing something important - those platforms have MAJOR influence over a large percent of the voters because they have been sucked into the mindset of social media is life. We are seeing a huge problem with Twitter, Facebook and Google because they are not letting the market determine their outcome, they are controlling the market. That is not healthy.

I get that but you are missing the long term consequences of fixing the problem in the short term.

Fixing the censorship with some websites today by censoring ALL websites tomorrow is not a good solution.

In reality politics has become a religion and despite what social media or MSM posts most people wont be steered away from their political deity. Heck they even are picking their political deity over family and friends. We have reached a level of absurdity like no other.

a reply to: interupt42
Section 230 has always been a double-edged sword, and will continue to be so. Striking a balance will likely never happen, and it will always be applied with bias. The new amendments seem to be aimed more at bias in moderation of the site from what I've read. Good thread and good points to bring up.

a reply to: interupt42

Net neutrality has been gone for a long time and the fears have not even begun to materialize though.

Meanwhile, the tech monopolies continue to act like Jon Stewart. Remember him? Lefties used to use him as their favorite source of news, and he was like Janus the two-faced god. When he was one most times, he was a political commentator, but when he stepped in it, he fell back on this excuse, "Why are you offended? I'm a comedian."

The social media giants are the same. They operate like Janus. When they want to restrict a view they don't like, they aggressively throttle it or even outright censor it. In those instances, they act like publishers will, screening the content they allow. However, when something on their sites cause public outcry, the turn around and hold their hands up and claim they are mere platform providing the tools to allow others to publish their content. They claim it's not their place or policy to act like publishers and screen content like that.

So far, they've gotten away with it, but this may be the straw that breaks the camel's back. Either they are platforms or they are publishers. In this case, they are aggressively acting like publishers, and there are a whole host of laws attendant on that especially where the 1st Amendment and political speech come into play.

Great how the lawyers figured out how to practice 1st Amendment rights and violate and deny the 1st Amendment at the same time 🎭🦃

originally posted by: Klassified
a reply to: interupt42
Section 230 has always been a double-edged sword, and will continue to be so. Striking a balance will likely never happen, and it will always be applied with bias. The new amendments seem to be aimed more at bias in moderation of the site from what I've read. Good thread and good points to bring up.

Agreed, Im not saying im completely for Section 230 but like you said its a double-edged sword and we need to proceed with caution. There are better alternatives with less consequences.

Let people say what they want. Let social media companies do what they want. Especially those who don't charge for using their platform. (Twitter, ATS, Facebook, etc.)

Targeting the news agencies politically might be a campaign contribution violation.

"in kind" contributions 🎭🦃

originally posted by: interupt42

originally posted by: HalWesten
You're missing something important - those platforms have MAJOR influence over a large percent of the voters because they have been sucked into the mindset of social media is life. We are seeing a huge problem with Twitter, Facebook and Google because they are not letting the market determine their outcome, they are controlling the market. That is not healthy.

I get that but you are missing the long term consequences of fixing the problem in the short term.

Fixing the censorship with some websites today by censoring ALL websites tomorrow is not a good solution.

In reality politics has become a religion and despite what social media or MSM posts most people wont be steered away from their political deity. Heck they even are picking their political deity over family and friends. We have reached a level of absurdity like no other.

I'm not missing it, I never said the current process is the right solution. I know what I would do if I could but until PEOPLE stop being lazy and letting others think for them, it's not going to get resolved.

a reply to: ketsuko

Net neutrality has been gone for a long time and the fears have not even begun to materialize though.

Yep, they have the tools but the consequences are so bad that they can't implement it just yet. The exploitation of the repeal will likely be implemented slowly and most likely after trump is gone.

Im just hoping that just because the left sucks so bad that we don't go bonkers aswell, and unintentionally give the keys to the kingdom down the road. more so than we a have already anyways.

nvm

a reply to: interupt42

I think part of it is because the it involves the ISPs, and there are actually far more of them than there are tech giants. The tech giants can more easily get away with this because they can more easily come to an arrangement to act as a monopoly to play foul. There is still come competition among the ISPs.

Trump a Billion air business man being played odd as the MOST essential thing for ANY business is communication's .
Really saying Trump does Not know how the Republicans will use laws to there own advantage Trump knows as president He is using his power as we type to delay a Crime Trial over one of his Business .

One thing for sure you dont get to be a president by not knowing .
Trump knows were all the body's are . To survive at the High end It is necessary to know .

The Thing is the others KNOW where Trumps body's are as well .
O Biden has committed crimes You say while at the same time saying Trump is SNOW WHITE . Trump is Orange not white .

People don't get to be Billionaires by playing by the rules .
As for free speech even ten years back they censored it as protesters were Hurried into fenced in areas .

Way to late for people to get a clue now . There will be NO NWO But what the worlds will end up with is most country's having little or no Rights after all LONG LONG agaio a COP could NOT JUST SEARCH YOUR CAR WITHOUT A WARRENT unless he had darn strong probable cause More then just a busted tail light stop .

Heck we made it easy for them with all the fighting over stupid stuff we do with each other .

The Funniest thing about this post is the poster comes on explains all this then says But I am Voting for Trump ( them anyway ) o and still try's giving Trump a pass .

The very few who relise the real problems do nothing but of course I understand why .
We have what Little we have to change anything we would need to lose even that .

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: interupt42

I think part of it is because the it involves the ISPs, and there are actually far more of them than there are tech giants. The tech giants can more easily get away with this because they can more easily come to an arrangement to act as a monopoly to play foul.

I also think there was a negotiated backroom deal between the ISP and the established tech oligarch that allowed net neutrality to get repealed. Once ISP started to extort money from the the tech oligarch they outspent the ISP lobbying to keep net neutrality in place then the last time around the Tech oligarch were suspiciously quite and spent no where near the effort they did the previous go arounds.

IMO I think the ISP and Tech oligarch came to an agreement that the ISP wont mess with the current established tech oligarch. All newcomers after certain date are fair game. Its a win win for them both.

There is still come competition among the ISPs.

There is but not really. Most cant switch fast broad band providers like myself because their is no alternative.
The ISP Oligarch has the system so well rigged that not even Google could penetrate it with google fiber. Google ran into anti competition regulations put their by the ISP. They have unwritten deals negotiated to not compete with each other or if one forces a certain rule like bandwidth limit they all will go to the same restrictions. The smaller start up that get lucky and start up often endup getting bought out. Tesla starlink has a bunch of limitations and not even close to be a viable asset for decades.

originally posted by: midnightstar
The Funniest thing about this post is the poster comes on explains all this then says But I am Voting for Trump ( them anyway ) o and still try's giving Trump a pass .

The funniest thing about this is your comprehension. Where did I say I was voting for trump?

Find one of my post where i have ever said that Im voting for trump. In fact I say the opposite and that I cant get behind him for certain things he has done like the things I listed here.

I even cautioned that the enemy of your enemy is not necessarily your friend.

a reply to: interupt42

Still they have to all agree or it's a no-go. Again, that makes the dangers of net neutrality difficult to materialize. Most of the realized dangers would so outrage people if implemented that they would have serious issues, and the temptations to break ranks would be too great because of the potential to grab market share.

They may have backroom agreements now, but there are still too many of them to implement the worst of the net neutrality fears.

Twisting the truth for political gain is lying to the people, that should not be allowed to be done. Our government should have a little rights to feed our people unbiased propaganda, but it should not be used in politics to promote one party or another.

People have been brainwashed on both sides thanks to an uncontrollable media that loves deceiving the public to get increased viewership...which is wrong too. Media should only post the truth unless they clearly mark it as an opinion in big letters at the top of their BS article.