Pew Study Confirms Online Platform Censorship

Uber Genius

"Super Genius"
Aug 13, 2016
2,919
1,243
Kentucky
✟56,826.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Big tech's censorship of conservative users is alive and well

Should we allow Google, Facebook, Twitter and other public forum platforms to censor content and views they disagree with?

We're not talking hate speech here.

We are talking about political, economic, and religious views.

In Canada and Great Britain people are being arrested for offensive language. At Emory in 2016 a message reading "Vote Trump" was said to throw liberals into feeling unsafe.

94% of British Universities are rated as censoring conservative speech in another report from 2018.

What should be the limits on censorship if any?
 
  • Optimistic
Reactions: USincognito

Mark Quayle

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist
Supporter
May 28, 2018
13,006
5,622
68
Pennsylvania
✟780,938.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
Big tech's censorship of conservative users is alive and well

Should we allow Google, Facebook, Twitter and other public forum platforms to censor content and views they disagree with?

We're not talking hate speech here.

We are talking about political, economic, and religious views.

In Canada and Great Britain people are being arrested for offensive language. At Emory in 2016 a message reading "Vote Trump" was said to throw liberals into feeling unsafe.

94% of British Universities are rated as censoring conservative speech in another report from 2018.

What should be the limits on censorship if any?


While I am against them doing it, Google, Facebook, Twitter, and most Universities (apart from Gov money support, that is) have the right to do as they wish concerning censoring --it is their property, and if they want they can throw you off it.

But when it the government supports a university monetarily, the government has the responsibility to protect freedom of religion, if by no other way, by removing their support (but lots of luck with that). I think the government has the right to do that even without a hearing, and if the university wants the money again, let them prove they were not violating freedom of religion/ speech.

If you are in my yard protesting Christianity, I have every right to give you the choice to shut up and give me your billboard, or leave my property.
 
Upvote 0

Uber Genius

"Super Genius"
Aug 13, 2016
2,919
1,243
Kentucky
✟56,826.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
A Pew opinion poll is NOT a study. And the opinions of respondents is not an indicator that Conservatives are being censored for their political views.
If you had read the article you would have seen that they called it a "study." Further Pew obviously doesn't agree. And for the details of why conservatives believe these claims one would go to say any of the documentation of the admissions and apologies for their censorship in sworn Congressional statements. So why the red herring?

The question was what should be allowed to be censored with regards to the religious, economic, and political views?

No non-sequiturs please. If you think there should be none and that there is currently none then state that. If you think that as Facebook chief, Mark Zuckerberg thinks that special access should be granted to Facebook methods to get the Democratic message out and not granted to Republicans (in fact shadow banning content that is pro-Republican then state that.
 
Upvote 0

Uber Genius

"Super Genius"
Aug 13, 2016
2,919
1,243
Kentucky
✟56,826.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
While I am against them doing it, Google, Facebook, Twitter, and most Universities (apart from Gov money support, that is) have the right to do as they wish concerning censoring --it is their property, and if they want they can throw you off it.

But when it the government supports a university monetarily, the government has the responsibility to protect freedom of religion, if by no other way, by removing their support (but lots of luck with that). I think the government has the right to do that even without a hearing, and if the university wants the money again, let them prove they were not violating freedom of religion/ speech.

If you are in my yard protesting Christianity, I have every right to give you the choice to shut up and give me your billboard, or leave my property.
True. Most private universities have free speech and academic freedom policies that serve as contractual obligations in some cases.

But the law aside, in the context of public or private post-secondary education, should teachers and students enjoy the freedom to argue political, economic, and religious views that are not shared by the majority?
 
Upvote 0

Hank77

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2015
26,368
15,457
✟1,099,338.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
If you think that as Facebook chief, Mark Zuckerberg thinks that special access should be granted to Facebook methods to get the Democratic message out and not granted to Republicans (in fact shadow banning content that is pro-Republican then state that.
Facebook is a private entity and does not receive taxpayer's money, they are free to do as they choose.
What's stopping conservatives or Republicans from starting their own social media site? Maybe the Koch brothers, Trump Int'l, and others would even invest to get it up and running?
 
Upvote 0

Uber Genius

"Super Genius"
Aug 13, 2016
2,919
1,243
Kentucky
✟56,826.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Facebook is a private entity and does not receive taxpayer's money, they are free to do as they choose.
What's stopping conservatives or Republicans from starting their own social media site? Maybe the Koch brothers, Trump Int'l, and others would even invest to get it up and running?

Obviously private colleges and businesses are not covered under the first amendment. So your view is that if universities and companies who's claim is to provide a unbiased platform in fact provide a biased one, well... caveat emptor. Got it.
 
Upvote 0

Hank77

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2015
26,368
15,457
✟1,099,338.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Obviously private colleges and businesses are not covered under the first amendment. So your view is that if universities and companies who's claim is to provide a unbiased platform in fact provide a biased one, well... caveat emptor. Got it.
I don't think social media sites or private colleges should be regulated by the government. Adults can make their own determinations about bias, is a school biased, how much bias is too much, etc., they don't need the government to do that for them.
My grandson's science text book shows favor/bias to creationism or evolution. Should the government interfere and tell that Christian school they can't use that text book?
 
Upvote 0

Uber Genius

"Super Genius"
Aug 13, 2016
2,919
1,243
Kentucky
✟56,826.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
I don't think social media sites or private colleges should be regulated by the government. Adults can make their own determinations about bias, is a school biased, how much bias is too much, etc., they don't need the government to do that for them.
My grandson's science text book shows favor/bias to creationism or evolution. Should the government interfere and tell that Christian school they can't use that text book?
If you look at the last descriptor under my avatar you will see I'm Libertarian. So I am not interested in having the government play much role in more than a handful of things. My interest is philosophical rather than political or legal. Namely from a free societal standpoint is the freedom in all venues to discuss all inferences as potential best explanations to the data a thing worth striving for?

This was the enlightenment project after all.

In this topic we are free to design any world we wish unconstrained by politics, or constitution, or existing cultural norms.

"What should be the limits on censorship if any?" still is the topic.
 
Upvote 0

Hank77

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2015
26,368
15,457
✟1,099,338.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
If you look at the last descriptor under my avatar you will see I'm Libertarian. So I am not interested in having the government play much role in more than a handful of things. My interest is philosophical rather than political or legal. Namely from a free societal standpoint is the freedom in all venues to discuss all inferences as potential best explanations to the data a thing worth striving for?

This was the enlightenment project after all.

In this topic we are free to design any world we wish unconstrained by politics, or constitution, or existing cultural norms.

"What should be the limits on censorship if any?" still is the topic.
I haven't considered the topic well enough to make an intelligent argument, for or against. Off hand I would say yes but I am sure with further consideration I would come up with exceptions.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

USincognito

a post by Alan Smithee
Supporter
Dec 25, 2003
42,058
16,810
Dallas
✟870,741.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
If you had read the article you would have seen that they called it a "study."
Well then a little intellectual curiosity and dig a bit deeper was called for. The word "study" is used by the The Hill author who was writing an opinion piece. You must have missed that part of the URL.
The Hill - covering Congress, Politics, Political Campaigns and Capitol Hillopinion/cybersecurity/397047

Pew doesn't do "studies". They do polls. And if you would have checked original Pew article, the word "study" appears nowhere on that page.
How Americans View Tech Companies

It's worth noting that in that same sentence the author shows she doesn't know what she's talking about.

A study released by the Pew Research Center in late June has once again brought to the surface a key issue of the Obama-era Title II net neutrality regulations: America’s concern about big tech’s approach to privacy, censorship and political bias and how Obama ignored it.​

As was discussed ad nauseum here, Net Neutrality has nothing to do with political content or bias and everything to do with ISPs slowing down content from sources other than preferred content (Netflix, Amazon, etc.). The author is arguing against a phantasm.

The question was what should be allowed to be censored with regards to the religious, economic, and political views?

The answer to that is anything that the content host wants to censor. No content host is required to give anyone a platform for their speech. It's mindblowing that supposed Conservatives want the government to force private corporations to host their speech.

And let it no go without being pointed out that the sturm und drang from Conservatives over the supposed suppression of their political views is that few, if any, are being censored for political views. More often than they're being shut down or out because they're jerks, because they use racist or homophobic slurs, because they spread bogus information or because they try to be L'enfant Terrible, but only are the former.

Remember when Alex Jones was removed from social media for his political views?

Pepperidge Farms doesn't remember because that never happened.
 
Last edited:
  • Winner
Reactions: whatbogsends
Upvote 0

Mark Quayle

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist
Supporter
May 28, 2018
13,006
5,622
68
Pennsylvania
✟780,938.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
True. Most private universities have free speech and academic freedom policies that serve as contractual obligations in some cases.

But the law aside, in the context of public or private post-secondary education, should teachers and students enjoy the freedom to argue political, economic, and religious views that are not shared by the majority?
Of course. And without fear of bullying.
 
Upvote 0