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.

 

Facebook blocks Republican Congressional Candidates video

page: 2
40
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 6 2018 @ 06:15 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing

Yeah, as soon as I saw the dead children, I was thinking "well there's your problem"




posted on Aug, 6 2018 @ 06:16 PM
link   
Censorship is a beautiful thing, if you're on the side that benefits from the censorship.




posted on Aug, 6 2018 @ 06:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: MonkeyFishFrog
a reply to: amazing

Yeah, as soon as I saw the dead children, I was thinking "well there's your problem"


Easily fixable. You can still go for shock value with less graphic images, the narration could have been more intense to compensate. Easily fixable.



posted on Aug, 6 2018 @ 06:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Greven
a reply to: Metallicus

Censorship happens even on ATS.

I didn't say anything about liking it. It's just the reality of our laws and Constitution.

They protect us from government censorship - not so much private.


If we can force people to bake gay wedding cakes we should at least be able to have free speech as well. I mean this is a corporation not a private citizen. Having all voices heard is good for our Republic.



posted on Aug, 6 2018 @ 06:20 PM
link   
a reply to: ausername

It is not censorship if the content of the video (opens with images of dead children) violates a company's policy on decency. If the candidate changed the images to something equally provocative but less dead children then the video wouldn't get flagged.



posted on Aug, 6 2018 @ 06:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: MonkeyFishFrog
a reply to: amazing

Yeah, as soon as I saw the dead children, I was thinking "well there's your problem"


Pretty obvious why they would have pulled the video.

Not sure why some are surprised. This candidate is an idiot for producing a campaign video like this. Or perhaps they knew better and having it pulled from FB was part of the goal.

Makes for great publicity.



posted on Aug, 6 2018 @ 06:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: MonkeyFishFrog
a reply to: ausername

It is not censorship if the content of the video (opens with images of dead children) violates a company's policy on decency. If the candidate changed the images to something equally provocative but less dead children then the video wouldn't get flagged.


If she was a liberal democrat I'll bet you there would be no problem with it. In fact she would be praised for showing where her heritage came from.

Meanwhile Diamond and Silk are unsafe for the Farcebook community.

I don't know, it all seems so pathetic when you look at it from an unbiased perspective.




posted on Aug, 6 2018 @ 06:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: MonkeyFishFrog
a reply to: amazing

Yeah, as soon as I saw the dead children, I was thinking "well there's your problem"


Pretty obvious why they would have pulled the video.

Not sure why some are surprised. This candidate is an idiot for producing a campaign video like this. Or perhaps they knew better and having it pulled from FB was part of the goal.

Makes for great publicity.


It does make for great publicity! A candidate non of us here on ATS ever heard of is now a hot topic discussion.



posted on Aug, 6 2018 @ 06:25 PM
link   
If you all are fine with these images, then you should be fine with someone from the left showing the images of the dead kids all shot up from Sandy Hook in order to sell the idea of gun legislation. Right?



posted on Aug, 6 2018 @ 06:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: ausername

originally posted by: MonkeyFishFrog
a reply to: ausername

It is not censorship if the content of the video (opens with images of dead children) violates a company's policy on decency. If the candidate changed the images to something equally provocative but less dead children then the video wouldn't get flagged.


If she was a liberal democrat I'll bet you there would be no problem with it. In fact she would be praised for showing where her heritage came from.

Meanwhile Diamond and Silk are unsafe for the Farcebook community.

I don't know, it all seems so pathetic when you look at it from an unbiased perspective.



LOL Who are these Diamond and Silk people that keep popping up on Facebook discussions? I get they are two black women who are Trump supporters (From ATS Discussions), but the only place I've ever heard of them is hear on ATS. Are they actually famous for something or just famous in the way Kim Kardashian is famous?



posted on Aug, 6 2018 @ 06:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: MonkeyFishFrog
a reply to: amazing

Yeah, as soon as I saw the dead children, I was thinking "well there's your problem"


Pretty obvious why they would have pulled the video.

Not sure why some are surprised. This candidate is an idiot for producing a campaign video like this. Or perhaps they knew better and having it pulled from FB was part of the goal.

Makes for great publicity.


It does make for great publicity! A candidate non of us here on ATS ever heard of is now a hot topic discussion.


The Right Wing persecution complex is a very powerful tool that can be used in a variety of ways.



posted on Aug, 6 2018 @ 06:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
If you all are fine with these images, then you should be fine with someone from the left showing the images of the dead kids all shot up from Sandy Hook in order to sell the idea of gun legislation. Right?


That's an...uncomfortable question.

I'd like to see how people respond to that.



posted on Aug, 6 2018 @ 06:28 PM
link   
I watched the video, the first few shots were a bit disturbing with the sudden music and dead bodies and all. I'm guessing if those weren't there the video would still be up.

Other than those first few shots the video was a run of the mill political ad, nothing special about it at all. Every politician makes the same promises yet very few if any ever follow through with them. Not sure why the OP believes it other than the fact they claim to lean a certain way.



posted on Aug, 6 2018 @ 06:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus

originally posted by: Greven
a reply to: Metallicus

Censorship happens even on ATS.

I didn't say anything about liking it. It's just the reality of our laws and Constitution.

They protect us from government censorship - not so much private.


If we can force people to bake gay wedding cakes we should at least be able to have free speech as well. I mean this is a corporation not a private citizen. Having all voices heard is good for our Republic.

People aren't forced to bake gay wedding cakes.

People are subject to penalties for discriminating against protected classes.

The people that discriminate say they can do so due to free speech / religion, and are losing.



posted on Aug, 6 2018 @ 06:32 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Well, in the past, the right has always said it is unconscionable to use suffering children for political points. So, yeah.



posted on Aug, 6 2018 @ 06:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Metallicus

originally posted by: Greven
a reply to: matafuchs

Facebook is a private company, so it can do what it wants with regard to content posted on it.


Not if they get themselves slapped with an anti-trust suit they can't.

Regardless, are you for the Internet Dark Ages? Do you REALLY want censorship as the norm?

I mean some of you people are nuts with wanting less free speech.

Censorship is the enemy of a free people.


What is your solution? Force private property owners to conform to what you find acceptable? Will you use the state to force your ideals?


That's the irony.

The Right: I should have the right to serve/service who I want in my business. No gays, no blacks.

Also the Right: How dare you ask us to leave for wearing a MAGA hat, or being a press secretary. How dare you, as a private company, take down our video.






posted on Aug, 6 2018 @ 06:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: ausername

originally posted by: MonkeyFishFrog
a reply to: ausername

It is not censorship if the content of the video (opens with images of dead children) violates a company's policy on decency. If the candidate changed the images to something equally provocative but less dead children then the video wouldn't get flagged.


If she was a liberal democrat I'll bet you there would be no problem with it. In fact she would be praised for showing where her heritage came from.

Meanwhile Diamond and Silk are unsafe for the Farcebook community.

I don't know, it all seems so pathetic when you look at it from an unbiased perspective.



Someone pointed out that the Republicans/Right/Alt-Right flip their sh*t and try to shut down the conversation the moment you try to talk about gun control after the death of children in a school shooting.

And that's without pictures.



posted on Aug, 6 2018 @ 06:33 PM
link   
So the right wing constantly insults the media, it's all fake news, and then get all butt hurt when the media says FU we just won't cover your campaigns.

You can't control private corporations with constant harassment. You reap what you sow....
edit on 6-8-2018 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 6 2018 @ 06:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: kaylaluv
If you all are fine with these images, then you should be fine with someone from the left showing the images of the dead kids all shot up from Sandy Hook in order to sell the idea of gun legislation. Right?


That's an...uncomfortable question.

I'd like to see how people respond to that.


I’ll always support more freedom. What a lot of people forget is free speech can also come with repercussions.



posted on Aug, 6 2018 @ 07:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Greven
a reply to: matafuchs

Facebook is a private company, so it can do what it wants with regard to content posted on it.


That is true, but it doesn't matter.

This thread is just another example of the Right Wing persecution complex.


Did they completely block the ad or did they put it behind one of those graphic content labels?



new topics

top topics



 
40
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join