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.

 

I warned trump haters; trump now may take action against social media companies

page: 1
68
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+56 more 
posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 04:29 PM
link   
I spent months ridiculing the idea that 12 Russian trolls posting on facebook had a significant effect on the election.

But not only was I told by people on ATS how serious this was, congress also had to have investigations, and many there blustered about how much this affected the election.

I said two things would come of this.

1. All sides would now be able to smear any movement or issue as being connected to russia. SO now we have jill steain and bernie being smeared as russians propping them up, in addition to trump.

But the shoe is on the other foot now as anti trump rallies have been formed by russian trolls, blm and lgbt causes are now being lumped in as shady because they are promoted by russians, as is the movement to disband ICE, and there are other anti trump issues being pushed by russian trolls.

So when people brush of these causes as helping russia, you know where it started.

2. This is the far more relevant point I wanted to discuss, and the point of this thread.

We were told how 12 russian trolls spending a few thousand bucks on facebook could swing or greatly influence an election.

Now to me, this is ridiculous, seeing as how BILLIONS of dollars are spent on campaigning for the election.

But i was told over and over again how powerful social media is, and how a few trolls could swing an election.

And now, as I predicted, this is opening the door for trump and conservatives to raise the obvious point;

If a dozen russian trolls using social media could have such an impact for one side conservatives, then what would it mean if the very people running these social media sites were running their platforms to censor conservatives to benefit liberals?

They have already acknowledged the vast power 12 trolls just using the platform could have.

So these platforms censoring conservatives in various ways would no doubt be exponentially more troubling.

And now, as we have seen today, trump is considering taking action against these companies.

www.cnbc.com...

SO to all of you who thought facebook and twitter were so powerful a few trolls using them would significantly affect an election, and the government needed to get involved.

I am sure you have no problem with the government getting involved now to make sure the actual owners of these platforms arent having a much greater affect on elections by censoring conservatives.

Myself and others keep telling the people that dislike trump; be careful cheering for corruption or ridiculous arguments, because these same tactics may be used by trump against people you like.

Seems like this turnabout happened rather quickly.
edit on 28-8-2018 by Grambler because: (no reason given)



+12 more 
posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 04:32 PM
link   
Given the rumors we're hearing of Chinese funding of various DC Think Tanks, I wonder how much of this is a Chinese ploy?


+19 more 
posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 04:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

I'm vehemently oppose more government regulation.... but in this case I believe it is needed.

We need to re-examine what a public utility is.


+2 more 
posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 04:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

i hadn't thought of social media in this way before.

social media is a powerful medium. if true, then any narrative can be pushed. scary if you stop and think about it. real scary


+8 more 
posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 04:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: SKEPTEK
a reply to: Grambler

I'm vehemently oppose more government regulation.... but in this case I believe it is needed.

We need to re-examine what a public utility is.



What will the democratic politicians that went on and on about how russian trolls using facebook was so affected of hurting hillary say?

"well yes, we needed an investigation and a task force to make sure a dozen russian trolls cant use facebook to swing an election. But if the owners of facebook (or twitter, google, etc.) are blocking conservative and pushing liberal content, thats no big deal at all"

Their own hyperbolic argument about trolls influencing the election will now be used against them.

Not that these politicians care though, they will just flip flop and be total hypocrites, and claim facebook et al should be allowed to censor conservative opinions.



posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 04:44 PM
link   
Speaking as a Trump hater, I also hate all of the companies named.
The only real difference I see is that the whole Facebook russian troll thing was actually happening, Facebook even acknowledged it. The Google part hasn't been proven yet. Not saying it isn't true, but he shouldn't start threatening people just because he doesn't like the search results. Come with facts, then put sanctions (or whatever) into place.

Personally, I feel that all social media should die. It was useful a decade ago, now it causes more harm than good.
As for Google, I don't like them as an organization, and the only time I use google products is for work, but in the truest sense of a free market, they're doing the best. They simply made the best product available for what they do (in terms of search engines). I disagree with a ton of their policies, and I won't use them for personal use, but I can't fault them for being good at what they do. If they're doing illegal things, then by all means, hit 'em hard. Until then...it's not like they have a monopoly on anything.


+10 more 
posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 04:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler
Love your common sense, well put together threads Grambler.

Trump and his administration are correct in looking into this censorship of Conservatives on social media. It is in fact collusion with the left, and the same rules need to apply.



posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 04:49 PM
link   
You're portraying Trump as someone who wants to restrict free speech because he wants to prevent conservatives from being censored on social media. Shouldn't we be concerned about social media censoring free speech?



posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 04:49 PM
link   
a reply to: narrator

I agree we should have proof that conservatives are being censored before action is taken.

However, the publicly available evidence for these companies shadow banning, outright banning, or skewing search results is pretty telling.

However, the issue is IF this is occurring, should the government step in, because it will massively affet elections.

The democrats seem to have already given the rational for intervention, and so at this point let the investigation to see if censorship is occurring begin.



Oh and brief aside, I do not mean trump hater as an insult, I consider myself a Hillary, Bush, Obama hater.



posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 04:50 PM
link   
What sort of action does Trump propose to take?

Something like taking away the broadcast licenses of TV networks? Remember that one?


edit on 8/28/2018 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 04:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: RKWWWW
You're portraying Trump as someone who wants to restrict free speech because he wants to prevent conservatives from being censored on social media. Shouldn't we be concerned about social media censoring free speech?


Yes we should definitely be concerned about that.

I dont know exactly where I come down on government intervention into that, but I am leaning toward it is almost a utility, and therefore the givernment should intervene.

However, the point I am making with this thread is that the democrats have already made the argument for intervention with there wailing over the 12 russian trolls, and now that very rationale will be used to make sure not just twelve trolls using the services arent influencing elections, but the actual people who run those services and the services themselves arent influencing elections.


+19 more 
posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 04:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
What sort of action does Trump propose to take?

Something like taking away the broadcast licenses of TV networks? Remember that one?



I am not sure.

Perhaps he will wiretap the people there he doesnt like, and inevstigate their parents.

You know, like obama did to james rosen!

I mean, thats nothing compared to trumps tweets though, right?

Anyways, whats that have to do with the topic?



posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 04:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

The problem is mass media advertising whoever talks crap about the government in internet, validating ignorance.

Then people believe it's true because they watched on tv.


+8 more 
posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 04:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler


Anyways, whats that have to do with the topic?


Here is the title of this thread

I warned trump haters; trump now may take action against social media companies
I asked what action he proposes to take against them.


And if you don't see the similarity to his temper tantrums about removing the broadcast licenses of TV networks you have a very severe case of confirmation bias.

edit on 8/28/2018 by Phage because: (no reason given)


+12 more 
posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 05:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

www.mercurynews.com...
Ending the subsidies would be a good start.

Next step would be application of antimonopoly laws which have been tested and found Constitutional. I'd love to see them not stop at social media for this one, however... let's apply them to the media in general. It's ridiculous that 5 multinational corporations control 90%+ of the media in this country. They represent the polar opposite of a "free media" as mandated in the Constitution.


+9 more 
posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 05:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
What sort of action does Trump propose to take?

Something like taking away the broadcast licenses of TV networks? Remember that one?



What action would be suitable to an entity that admits to eavesdropping on its users even when said users have explicitly not given consent?



posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 05:03 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6




Ending the subsidies would be a good start.

I don't see any federal subsidies of social media listed in that article.



They represent the polar opposite of a "free media" as mandated in the Constitution.
The Constitution talks about the press. Social media, not so much.

edit on 8/28/2018 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 05:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage


And if you don't see the similarity to his temper tantrums about removing the broadcast licenses of TV networks you have a very severe case of confirmation bias.


Takes one to recognize another, aaaamirite?



On topic: why are you discussing something that never happened?


+9 more 
posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 05:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

So a tweet from a year ago is to you a 'threat' to remove their license?



“Fake @NBCNews made up a story that I wanted a ‘tenfold’ increase in our U.S. nuclear arsenal. Pure fiction, made up to demean. NBC = CNN!” Trump wrote on Twitter, equating the two TV news outlets he has most often lashed out against. “With all of the Fake News coming out of NBC and the Networks, at what point is it appropriate to challenge their License? Bad for country!”


He is stating that with all of the fake news when do you challenge whether they are a real news agency. I see nothing wrong with this statement.



+10 more 
posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 05:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
What sort of action does Trump propose to take?

Something like taking away the broadcast licenses of TV networks? Remember that one?



How about bans on discrimination?

If a private Christian baker must bake a cake for a gay couple, surely a private billionaire fake-socialist like Zukerberg must allow conservatives on his site, equality and tolerance and all that jazz.

Response comment that " it's not like that and it only works in ONE socialist direction" coming in 5,4,3,2,1....
edit on 28-8-2018 by M5xaz because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
68
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join