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.

 

Hey libertarians, is this still OK, or is there some kind of line somewhere?

page: 1
29
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+11 more 
posted on Jul, 16 2021 @ 07:30 AM
link   
nypost.com...


White House press secretary Jen Psaki said Thursday the Biden administration is identifying “problematic” posts for Facebook to censor because they contain “misinformation” about COVID-19.

Psaki disclosed the government’s role in policing social media during her daily press briefing after Surgeon General Vivek Murthy called on companies to purge more pandemic posts.

The demand for censorship — and Psaki’s admission of government involvement — follows a series of flip-flops from health officials who contradicted themselves throughout the pandemic on issues such as mask efficacy, as well as censorship of claims that later gained credibility, such as the theory that COVID-19 leaked from a Chinese lab.


Now I'm sure we can all just go out and make our own Facebook or whatever, but at some point, you have to drop the water buckets and accept reality. The Government is censoring opposing viewpoints on Social Media. Most of us suspected government involvement, but had to yield to the constitution in regards to the private company things, as long as they operated like a private company. Well, having the government be your fact checkers isn't what I would call "operated like a private company", it's much, much closer to being a propaganda arm.

So my question is simple. Is this still OK?



posted on Jul, 16 2021 @ 07:32 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

They can ask them and what those companies do is their business. When they compel them, or imply there could be ramifications if they don't, that's where it becomes un-Constitutional.







edit on 16-7-2021 by AugustusMasonicus because: Cooking spirits since 2007


+14 more 
posted on Jul, 16 2021 @ 07:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: network dude

They can ask them and what those companies do is their business. When they compel them, or imply there could be ramifications if they don't, that's where it becomes un-Constitutional.








so a little government involvement in the censoring process is OK. Well, now I have my answer. Thanks!



posted on Jul, 16 2021 @ 07:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: network dude
so a little government involvement in the censoring process is OK. Well, now I have my answer. Thanks!


You're welcome.

Just shows why you shouldn't be on Facebook (you deleted your account, right?), Twitter and all that other crap.



posted on Jul, 16 2021 @ 07:39 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Nope. Never was okay. Still not okay for the government to tell a private business what they can do. Whether social media is a platform or publisher and whether they need to adhere to the laws surrounding publishers liability for their content is still up for debate.


+12 more 
posted on Jul, 16 2021 @ 07:44 AM
link   
I yearn for the pre-cell phone (and pre-internet) days. The freedom was astonishing when compared to today's version. Somehow we all survived, held our protests, expressed our views and got on with life.
edit on 16-7-2021 by Avardan because: (no reason given)


+6 more 
posted on Jul, 16 2021 @ 07:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: network dude

They can ask them and what those companies do is their business. When they compel them, or imply there could be ramifications if they don't, that's where it becomes un-Constitutional.







Something seems very dirty about it when the same government that can either impose a huge tax on social media... or give them a virtually tax free status by virtue of legislation, can also urge those private companies to censor viewpoints that oppose what the government wants.


+2 more 
posted on Jul, 16 2021 @ 07:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: network dude
so a little government involvement in the censoring process is OK. Well, now I have my answer. Thanks!


You're welcome.

Just shows why you shouldn't be on Facebook (you deleted your account, right?), Twitter and all that other crap.


I still have a facebook, I post about twice a year. If you own a small business, you have things you have to do in order to function. If you work for someone else, they do all that.

But this is about the big picture, not my little world.

I suppose it's just blind luck that facebook, twitter, google, and the rest are all in lock step with the Government, so nobody has to "twist any arms" and make this a problem for the constitution.

But I have to go now, my new personal version of facebook/twitter isn't going to code itself.


+3 more 
posted on Jul, 16 2021 @ 07:46 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Government and social mediaa are ideologically married. Social media has become the voice of government.

And of course there is coersion. If social media companies don't comply then governemnt will just claim monopolies and break them up, Warren has been the "stick" and the "carrot" is just them doing whatever they want as long as they do the biddings of government.



posted on Jul, 16 2021 @ 07:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: network dude

They can ask them and what those companies do is their business. When they compel them, or imply there could be ramifications if they don't, that's where it becomes un-Constitutional.







Something seems very dirty about it when the same government that can either impose a huge tax on social media... or give them a virtually tax free status by virtue of legislation, can also urge those private companies to censor viewpoints that oppose what the government wants.


When I was a wee lad, they taught us about communism and the tactics used by the leaders. Propaganda and control of information was on the list. Boy were my teachers stupid. They didn't even tell me I was an oppressor.



posted on Jul, 16 2021 @ 07:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy
Something seems very dirty about it when the same government that can either impose a huge tax on social media...


That comes from Congress, not the White House and it would be pretty transparent if something like that occurred.

A quid pro quo in that regard should be challenged on Constitutional grounds.



posted on Jul, 16 2021 @ 07:49 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

It's not a good look, but as long as the government isn't forcing these companies to take their suggestions then it's still ultimately up to the company.

It's similar to how back in 2016 the FBI wanted Apple to make them software that would allow them to break the encryption on iPhones. Just because the government made a request doesn't mean Apple was compelled to create software that would allow law enforcement to gain access to a person's personal files without need for a search warrant doesn't mean they were required to do so.

In that case Apple declined the FBI's request.

So yes there is a line. And that line is crossed when the government takes away a company's right to operate autonomously. As far as I can see, these companies are still able to operate as they see fit and are not bound by law to take the government's recommendations. Therefore, no line has been crossed.



posted on Jul, 16 2021 @ 07:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: network dude
I suppose it's just blind luck that facebook, twitter, google, and the rest are all in lock step with the Government, so nobody has to "twist any arms" and make this a problem for the constitution.


As long as they are doing it by their own volition there is noting illegal about that, it's not a great look but I can point to countless examples of 'not a great look'.


But I have to go now, my new personal version of facebook/twitter isn't going to code itself.


At least you're doing something about it instead of continuing to give them your support.



posted on Jul, 16 2021 @ 07:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: butcherguy
Something seems very dirty about it when the same government that can either impose a huge tax on social media...


That comes from Congress, not the White House and it would be pretty transparent if something like that occurred.

A quid pro quo in that regard should be challenged on Constitutional grounds.



I'm sure The Government has set up special watch dog groups to make sure that never happens.
I'd bet facebook and twitter also have teams that co-ordinate with their government counterparts to ensure nothing like that is ever found out ever happens.



posted on Jul, 16 2021 @ 07:54 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Nope, not cool.

Many countries are partnered up with FB and T whether officially or not, and the companies obviously listen to them, or the threat of regulation, and repercussions loom.

There shouldn't be any government intervention at all.

They're pushing all the wrong buttons at the perfect time.

Like they want something to kick off...



posted on Jul, 16 2021 @ 07:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: network dude
I'm sure The Government has set up special watch dog groups to make sure that never happens.


They don't need to, legislation is public.



posted on Jul, 16 2021 @ 07:56 AM
link   
Remember when Kennedy asked the press not to talk about stuff in the 1960's? Did they need to listen to him? Did some leak plans anyway?



posted on Jul, 16 2021 @ 07:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: network dude
so a little government involvement in the censoring process is OK. Well, now I have my answer. Thanks!


You're welcome.

Just shows why you shouldn't be on Facebook (you deleted your account, right?), Twitter and all that other crap.


From what I had seen they were "working with SMS carriers" . This isn't just facebook etc. it is text messaging apps as well -- the modern alternative to voice phone.



posted on Jul, 16 2021 @ 07:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Halfswede

And? My point still stands. Unless they compel them and it's not optional those are the breaks.



posted on Jul, 16 2021 @ 07:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: butcherguy
Something seems very dirty about it when the same government that can either impose a huge tax on social media...


That comes from Congress, not the White House and it would be pretty transparent if something like that occurred.

A quid pro quo in that regard should be challenged on Constitutional grounds.


I heard that the Democrat led Congress and the Democrat led White House might be working together on a lot of things. Whodathunkit?
That would be up to the Supreme Court regarding a Constitutional challenge.

The Supreme Court is as political as the other branches and it certainly isn't infallible.
Remember Dred Scott decision?
Politicians deemed it proper that black people be relegated to non-citizen status.
Was that a good decision? While it isn't now, it was the law of the land for a while.



new topics

top topics



 
29
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join