It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Web giants to cooperate on removal of extremist content

page: 5
45
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 06:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Aazadan

Censorship by any other name, smells just as foul.



Is encouraging people to sign their names to the beliefs they publish really censorship though?
YES because some jackball can say something ridiculous and then sign your name to it.




posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 06:32 PM
link   
a reply to: gernblan

Like speak? Sure


I get what your hinting at but were talking about speech and expression.



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 06:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: gernblan

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Aazadan

Censorship by any other name, smells just as foul.



Is encouraging people to sign their names to the beliefs they publish really censorship though?
YES because some jackball can say something ridiculous and then sign your name to it.

JinMI is a first rate gentleman! P.S. I'm a jackball!


Yes, it's certainly possible.



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 06:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: gernblan
YES because some jackball can say something ridiculous and then sign your name to it.


Only if they had your account. That's easy to (mostly) solve by using biometric passwords. Every phone, every laptop, and a good portion of desktop computers have cameras. Take a picture of the face of who is posting, run it against the facial recognition database. Easy way to verify a poster beyond simply a "hackable" login password.
edit on 6-12-2016 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 06:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Aazadan

Your confusing rights vs ideals. In this case, corporations and their users. However, as was in the op and as a poster mentioned, if there was a push for this censorship by the government would that not qualify as an infringement on the 1st?

Also, in the eyes of the US, you need not be a citizen to enjoy freedom of speech.

nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


Lastly, within the US our rights are not privilege to documentation. No need to show papers.



I believe that if the government pushes these companies to take censorship actions it's a violation of free speech.

When it comes to non citizens getting constitutional protections, it's the same thing. Verify who you are (to prove you're not an enemy who doesn't get them), and there's nothing we can do.

The exercise our rights in the US though, we do have to show papers at times. For example, you need to identify yourself properly to buy/carry a firearm. You need to prove who you are to show documents under the 4th are yours. You need certain credentials for press protections. And so on. Even to get into a national park and enjoy the scenery you need to show a valid ID (and the same goes for alcohol/tobacco). I see nothing wrong with showing papers in this regard.

It would be a one time thing to verify an account as belonging to you, not making you carry papers around for travel.



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 06:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

From my OP

Tech companies have long resisted outside intervention in how their sites should be policed, but have come under increasing pressure from Western governments to do more to remove extremist content following a wave of militant attacks.


That would be the push.



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 06:51 PM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

Yes, and I think that verified posters are a way to combat that. I don't like the idea that Western Governments are putting pressure on these companies to crack down on it. I believe a crackdown is necessary, but I don't truly trust either private corporations or governments with the power of censorship. Instead my solution is to take it out of their hands completely. Prove that people are citizens and therefore deserving of free speech and the government has to back off. On the corporate side, make a persons content easily searchable and linked to their name, and people will cool off when acting like a jackass has real life consequences for them.



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 07:06 PM
link   
Censorship he we come. Extremist? More like anyone who disagrees with their narrative. Why didn't they do this year's ago with isis on twitter? They won't even touch any Islamic radical twitter accounts and go straight after anyone on the right.



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 07:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

So lets say there is a process. What keeps the government from censoring?



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 07:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

Just curious, why don't you sign your name and address at the end of your posts or in your signature.




posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 07:16 PM
link   
Terrorism is subjective. Will this create more "terrorists" just like the war on drugs created more "criminals".


Grab the popcorn!

United States of Authority-Coming to a nation near you.



---Disclaimer---

(Terrorism IS subjective in this user's opinion-to beat a dead horse, one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist. This user believes that the creation of terrorists and the elevated threat of terrorism worldwide since the late 90's and especially September 11th, 2001 it is clear that many of these are in fact state created but all the same the motivation is there for individual or group/gang like coordinated attacks. Middle Eastern ((& African) countries have been destroyed by western nations for any and all reasons that create more perceived wealth and increase the value of the almighty dollar. It is only appropriate for me to decide in my own opinion that if these individuals who have carried out terrorist acts over the last 15-20 years are acting alone or without the cooperation of a much larger nation-state; it can only be due to the fact that their worlds have been destroyed by the very beast that they aim to harm. However, aside from the 9/11 attacks in the United States and the horrible attempt to stage an attack on the Pentagon it is curious to this individual that the majority of attacks on first world nations have not been aimed at ruling parties but rather average people. Do they really have it out against every day average people for having freedoms? Or do they try to convey a message that we have allowed our leaders to destroy their worlds so they will destroy ours.)


The rabbit hole is much deeper than you are prepared to go. I mean, what if you were more than you to begin with?

It is as if those who control the world move the pendulum of Europe and Africa with war and that of Central and South America with drugs.

Wars against Nations or Drugs I do not see ending soon. Profits are too high.
edit on 6-12-2016 by WhoWhatWhenWhere2420 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 07:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Exactly.


"First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me."


Link.

So if people don't think any of this applies to them and what they say, it will be too late by the time it does.


Good quote from WWII.

I'm reminded of the Malcolm X quote: “If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing.”



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 07:47 PM
link   


EU to tech industry: Remove hate speech faster or we'll make you


This is scary, because eventually anything can be defined as hate speech, sort of how almost anything can be called terrorism now.
edit on 6-12-2016 by CB328 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 07:53 PM
link   
This is a blatant attack on freedom of speech disguised as fighting "fake news" and terrorism.

The Muslim brotherhood was just verified on Twitter not that long ago I'm sure the account won't be banned or censored.

But god forbid anyone mentions that little food name that shall not be named.



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 07:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Konduit
a reply to: Echo007

YouTube shadow bans comments on certain videos based on certain keywords. You can see your post, but nobody else can.

Reddit has implemented this sort of system in the past few months as well, especially in the default political subs. Expect many major media platforms to start going full throttle with it.


I used to wonder if this was happening at times, on certain websites. Because it seemed like people couldn't see a few comments I made.

Is this really a proven thing?



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 08:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ohanka
a reply to: thekaboose

There's no distinction between large corporations and the state anymore. There hasn't been for a long time.


Getting close to Mussolini's definition of fascism.



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 08:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Box of Rain

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: odzeandennz

So you agree with clamping down on free speech?

I think discussion and debate go further to combat ignorance than trying to silence them.


A company or corporation is allowed to do what it wants to curb free speech.. There is no protection in the Constitution against a company or person from curtailing your free speech; a company (or a person) can do what it wants. The constitution only says that the government can't curtail free speech.

The First Amendment:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."



Yes, but that is the letter of the law not the spirit.

When the government and powerful corporations are in cahoots together, especially media and internet companies, your argument starts to not quite work as far as the spirit of the thing.



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 08:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: RedDragon
Good, and this was a long time coming.

There's so much open racism, sexism, and fake news that hurts our society being shamelessly propagated under the guise of anonymity. I have no tolerance for hate speech and outright lying in a tolerant, free democracy.


It is true that this exists, and that the internet and society have a lot of liars, racists, crazies, etc.

But you know what, we also have a totally sold out corporate media, which functionally now is an organ of power and propaganda for the military-industrial complex. A LOT of my mainstream friends, for the first time ever, are saying they are realizing that the normal news isn't covering everything. My family, who were about as mainstream and brainwashed as any, are now saying that the media/journalists aren't doing their job.

The mainstream media pumps out a lot of "fake" news all of the time. Foreign policy coverage is rarely unbiased, and frequently misrepresents the US' role in international affairs.
edit on 6-12-2016 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 09:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: RedDragon
Good, and this was a long time coming.

There's so much open racism, sexism, and fake news that hurts our society being shamelessly propagated under the guise of anonymity. I have no tolerance for hate speech and outright lying in a tolerant, free democracy.


Well this is a REPUBLIC.with democratic elections. not a true democracy in reality. People need to start saying this again and teaching it again.



posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 09:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Box of Rain

Its either do that or lose the website altogether when they come to shut it down then. This would prevent microsoft from holding you hostage to their Ideaology. You can still allow a bigot to speak. it shows how stupid they are. It s not like post cant be transferred to a forum for the hatemongers to troll in is it?

Companies need to be held to a higher standard sometimes. The government is using companies as scapegoats.




top topics



 
45
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join