Mark Zuckerberg Copies Elon Musk as Facebook to Become Free Speech Platform

[RileyG]

We’re still allowed (aren’t we) to eschew holding any opinion on the present subject, yes?

Yes.

 

[timothyu]

We’re still allowed (aren’t we) to eschew holding any opinion on the present subject, yes?

Control of the narrative has changed for at least four years hopefully. Otherwise the previous one sidedness may have gained its goal of supremacy. People die to end their power. Fortunately elections can have the same result.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

It would appear that Meta tapped Joel Kaplan to become their new content global policy chief.
(he's actually been a VP in that division for over a decade)

He's a Harvard Grad who was a former Deputy Chief of Staff for George W Bush.

 

[Pommer]

Control of the narrative has changed for at least four years hopefully. Otherwise the previous one sidedness may have gained its goal of supremacy. People die to end their power. Fortunately elections can have the same result.

Still, the thread/issue is “private company does things!”
So what?

 

[zippy2006]

Still, the thread/issue is “private company does things!”
So what?

The reason Musk bought Twitter and reformed the rules to reflect the public square is because Twitter is not just a private company, it is the public square. Or rather, it is part of the public square, and was devised and built up to be such.

For example, if Twitter locks the accounts of all European heads of state and government agencies, would that be viewed as, "Private company does things"? Of course not.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Still, the thread/issue is “private company does things!”
So what?

It would appear that elected members of the Democratic party don't share your "meh, what's the big deal?" sentiments.

Loading…

thehill.com

“This is just genuflecting to Donald Trump, that’s what this is,” said Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), former head of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. “I’ve already had a lot of concerns about how social media companies don’t stop disinformation. I think this is just continuing that.”

Rep. Jamie Raskin (Md.), senior Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, offered a similar warning, saying Meta’s move will come at the expense of fact-based discourse, an educated electorate and a healthy democracy.



It would seem as if house democrats rather enjoyed the previous arrangement where they could call any opposition "misinformation", and outsource the task of "deciding what fits that definition" to a bunch of organizations that are funded through endowments from democratic mega-donors who share their values (or in some cases, publicly funded)

 

[MehGuy]

To most liberals, conservative views are hate speech.

Liberals use the label hate speech far more often, but sadly a lot of them engage in sexism and racism themselves. It's ridiculous for example to listen to a feminist chastise a conservative for engaging in stereotypes or fear mongering.

 

[MehGuy]

If the left is so worried about the rise of racism and sexism they should work on bringing out a more consistent message, instead of trying to bury the consequences of their hypocritical behavior in censoring speech they do not like. Increasingly it's not going to work out for them.

They can whine about Trump and whatnot all they like, when it would be more productive to look at themselves in the mirror and seriously question if they themselves are also apart of the problem.

 

[timothyu]

when it would be more productive to look at themselves in the mirror and seriously question if they themselves are also apart of the problem.

That's the point. God says we are ALL wrong. So what do we do? Change? Nope! We divvy things up and take sides so each can think it is only the other side that is wrong and nothing is accomplished. Typical human thinking. And God of course still says we are ALL wrong.

 

[Pommer]

It would appear that elected members of the Democratic party don't share your "meh, what's the big deal?" sentiments.

Loading…

thehill.com

“This is just genuflecting to Donald Trump, that’s what this is,” said Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), former head of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. “I’ve already had a lot of concerns about how social media companies don’t stop disinformation. I think this is just continuing that.”

Rep. Jamie Raskin (Md.), senior Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, offered a similar warning, saying Meta’s move will come at the expense of fact-based discourse, an educated electorate and a healthy democracy.



It would seem as if house democrats rather enjoyed the previous arrangement where they could call any opposition "misinformation", and outsource the task of "deciding what fits that definition" to a bunch of organizations that are funded through endowments from democratic mega-donors who share their values (or in some cases, publicly funded)

Politicians are going to politick; I’m still on “meh”.

 

[MehGuy]

That's the point. God says we are ALL wrong. So what do we do? Change? Nope! We divvy things up and take sides so each can think it is only the other side that is wrong and nothing is accomplished. Typical human thinking. And God of course still says we are ALL wrong.

I would like to get into the heads of some of these liberals, especially the white male ones. Some of them are intelligent and probably have a difficult time not being self aware how hypocritical many on their side are. Do they suffer from idealism? That for whatever reason white men should just suck it up and take these double standards? They do, and therefore others should be able to? Do they not realize that others may be hardwired differently and will never embrace such a stance?

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Politicians are going to politick; I’m still on “meh”.

But they don't just "politick" in the realm of social media, they prescribe (through indirect threats) changes that suit their vision.

Calling people up to give sworn testimony in front of the Senate goes beyond the normal "blowing hot air" lol