Free Alex Jones

[ananda]

Sounds then, like you don't support Alex Jones.

I support his right to free speech. I also support private companies' rights to exclude whomever they wish.

 

[AirPo]

But this thread is not about Alex Jones' free speech. It's about his idea that Alex Jones thinks he

should forcefully decide for others or everyone else.

 

[Yarddog]

YouTube, Facebook, Spotify and Apple apparently decided it was a good idea to remove content associated with InfoWars and its founder Alex Jones. This is just one of many crimes of the regressive left. Whether or not you like him, it should be clear that Alex Jones has the right to post the content that he posts.

Alex Jones is a menace to society. He has the right to his opinions but not to post them anywhere he chooses.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

To be clear, is it any sort of government entity that's silencing him? Or are we talking strictly about private entities?

Private entities can set whatever content restrictions they like.

Alex isn't the only one that's been hit recently by YouTube...

A number of vegans have been hit due to YT claiming that their activities "encourage extremists actions", and a number of bodybuilders have had their content taken down (or demonetized) due to YT claiming that their content "encourages steroid use".

However, if you're looking for a funny Alex clip, search on YouTube for "alex jones gets mad then apologizes"...it's good for a chuckle.

 

[essentialsaltes]

(What a political party with a problem with free speech might look like.)

 

[ananda]

But this thread is not about Alex Jones' free speech. It's about his idea that Alex Jones thinks he

This is about both, at least to me.

He can speak all he wants in the Public forum where his right to any and all speech should be fully protected, or in private forums that permit his speech.

He cannot and should not try to force private forums to allow his speech.

 

[super animator]

To be clear, is it any sort of government entity that's silencing him? Or are we talking strictly about private entities?

Private entities can set whatever content restrictions they like.

Alex isn't the only one that's been hit recently by YouTube...

A number of vegans have been hit due to YT claiming that their activities "encourage extremists actions", and a number of bodybuilders have had their content taken down (or demonetized) due to YT claiming that their content "encourages steroid use".

Which probably isn't making any revenue for Youtube in the first place. Call me cynical Rob, they turn a blind eye to certain content when violate their content restrictions when it makes them their sweet cash.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Which probably isn't making any revenue for Youtube in the first place. Call me cynical Rob, they turn a blind eye to certain content when violate their content restrictions when it makes them their sweet cash.

That's not always true...bodybuilding and fitness YouTube channels often generate a ton of ad revenue from the supplement companies. And like I mentioned, those guys have been getting hit quite a bit.

 

[RDKirk]

I was not at Sandy Hook, and so I am agnostic about the matter.

I support the right to free speech, and the right for everyone to decide what is false speech for themselves ... I do not support the idea that one (or a few) chosen ones can or should forcefully decide for others or everyone else.

Let's be sure we understand what you're saying: You are supporting the unfettered liberty of someone to deliberately deceive other people on the pretext that truth is up to individual opinion.

Fraud. You're supporting a right to commit fraud.

 

[SkyWriting]

The campaign to shut up people who are not politically correct has been ongoing for some time now, and this is simply the latest development in that movement (which was demonstrated when Facebook, Spotify, You Tube and other social media discovered on the same day (!) that this one outlet fails to meet their standards and so must go).

You are entitled to control the content of your posts.
Same thing.

 

[SkyWriting]

I support the right to free speech, and the right for everyone to decide what is false speech for themselves ... I do not support the idea that one (or a few) chosen ones can or should forcefully decide for others or everyone else.

So you support he ability of You Tube to control it's content.
It has always done that for over a decade.

 

[Ana the Ist]

(What a political party with a problem with free speech might look like.)

Lol how hard did you have to look for that example?

With so many other fine examples eminating regularly from our own colleges and their liberal students...it's amusing you picked one example of twelve right wingers attacking a bookstore of all places lol. I mean, how much damage could they really have done? It's a bookstore....a type of business that's rapidly going in the direction of video stores and film developers.

 

[Hank77]

Let's be sure we understand what you're saying: You are supporting the unfettered liberty of someone to deliberately deceive other people on the pretext that truth is up to individual opinion.

Fraud. You're supporting a right to commit fraud.

And the right to promote harassment and violence towards innocent people like the Sandy Hook parents.

I found, when searching YouTube, Alex Jones, this video from Young Turks, who are Very liberal, about free speech and Alex Jones.
"Alex Jones Gets Banned"
I can't post the link because Jones uses the Lord's name in vain.

 

[Albion]

And the right to promote harassment and violence towards innocent people like the Sandy Hook parents..

I would be interested to read the defense of those social media outlets for keeping the same thing on their sites when it comes from left-wing outfits.

Oh, thats right. In their case, it is not harassment and violence [sic] against anyone, but rather free speech on a privately owned news site exercising its rights blah blah.

 

[usexpat97]

I am disappointed in Alex Jones. He was a major player bringing 9/11 as an inside job to light, but his posts did violate those companies' TOS, fair-and-square.

I will give this much, though: Facebook, Youtube, Spotify AND Apple all removed his content at the same time? That's a conspiracy.

 

[mala]

I am disappointed in Alex Jones. He was a major player bringing 9/11 as an inside job to light, but his posts did violate those companies' TOS, fair-and-square.

I will give this much, though: Facebook, Youtube, Spotify AND Apple all removed his content at the same time? That's a conspiracy.

no it's not.
he did violate several tos' and has been warned in the past on multiple occasions. just because it's happening at the same time is meaningless in this case.
and guess what his app is still on the appstores of those services so what exactly is he losing?
like i said before he can always just buy his own servers and host his own videos but he won't because he isn't someone who actually cares about that.
he just wants money and having to pay for his own stuff isn't something that appeals to him.

 

[ananda]

Let's be sure we understand what you're saying: You are supporting the unfettered liberty of someone to deliberately deceive other people on the pretext that truth is up to individual opinion.

Fraud. You're supporting a right to commit fraud.

No, I support free speech as enshrined in the Constitution.

Everyone must decide for themselves what degree of deliberate deception or sincerity someone is employing in their communication, and respond accordingly.

 

[wing2000]

Don't worry Alex, former Sheriff Joe Arpaio has your back! [...seems Joe is looking for any help he can get with his Senate primary race):

https://www.azcentral.com/story/opi...e-arpaio-jumps-stand-up-alex-jones/931000002/

 

[ananda]

So you support he ability of You Tube to control it's content.
It has always done that for over a decade.

Certainly - if it is a completely private entity.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Lol how hard did you have to look for that example?

Lol. Since it's datelined today, not hard at all.

it's amusing you picked one example of twelve right wingers attacking a bookstore of all places lol. I mean, how much damage could they really have done? It's a bookstore....

Lol. Don't you care about the destruction of private property?