canuckblue
Player Valuation: £50m
One thing to remember. After Trump is no longer a POTUS, he'll still be a POS.
Current Affairs Donald Trump POS: Judgement cometh and that right soon
- Thread starter kithnou
- Start date
- Status
It doesn't work as an acronym, but I think he should be called SCROTUS after he leaves office.
EDIT: It does work....
Sedicious
Cnut
Ring
Of
The
United
States
What Americans think is extreme liberalism is barely middle politics in most European democracies
Everyone should have access to heathcare that does not put them into bankruptcy if they have a serious illness = radical progressive agenda
Right, I’m going to preface this by saying, I don’t really care that Trump got banned off social media. However, the precedent it sets is, quite frankly, frightening, and we are seeing more and more of this.
this isn’t about left or right wing voices, it’s not about sides. It’s about the fact that social media platforms are built and are successful and have made their weirdo creators billions based on the premise of encouraging discussion, encouraging people to have a voice.
Now watch this
this isn’t what should be happening, that these companies, these individuals, can control or manipulate so much of what people see and take in
as I said, Trump is a bad meff. He’s done enough to warrant getting banned. But, these companies can control the narrative in whichever way they want, and that to me is something which is pretty bloody scary
this isn’t about left or right wing voices, it’s not about sides. It’s about the fact that social media platforms are built and are successful and have made their weirdo creators billions based on the premise of encouraging discussion, encouraging people to have a voice.
Now watch this
this isn’t what should be happening, that these companies, these individuals, can control or manipulate so much of what people see and take in
as I said, Trump is a bad meff. He’s done enough to warrant getting banned. But, these companies can control the narrative in whichever way they want, and that to me is something which is pretty bloody scary
I'd counter that people who's views of the world are built off of social media need to take a long hard look at themselves.
Social media is big because people lap it up. The issue isn't silencing the extreme voices who post on their platforms. The issue is the algorithms which take what you view and then curate what you see, so you only get content that feeds your bias.
There is no reason whatsoever to listen to/read anything produced by James O'Keefe and Project Veritas.
I agree, but social media controls what people consume, what people take in, the information they see. The things they buy, the things they watch.
I'll give you a much less extreme example.
My dad is a social media consultant for a few small independent stores and shops here in the UK.
Over Christmas, for a clothing range he does the social media for, his account on Facebook got banned because one of their images was of a Santa holing a glass of whiskey, and some slogan about the clothes (it's a bit of a 'laddy' brand). Nothing dangerous, nothing untoward. Just advertising.
It was banned, automatically, on the basis of 'promoting alcohol'. A Santa, holding a glass of whiskey.
They have so much control. I don't care that they banned Trump - other than I think they made him a bit of a 'Martyr' for his supporters. But the idea that they can ban who or what they like, because they don't agree with them, isn't right.
Trump crossed the line because, directly or indirectly, his comments ended up inciting violence. But, we've seen that happen plenty of times on both sides of the argument and plenty of times no action has been taken - and sometimes it has.
But discourse cannot just be silenced or directed in a certain way because one ego-maniac CEO thinks so. That's not the world we should want to live in. I firmly believe in that.
I think you can say that without having to put a MAGA hat on or defend Trump or those idiots at the Capitol last week.
I mean that's video evidence, but okay.
Look, as I say, I don't like Trump. I have no place in the fight in America but I'm very happy he didn't get another term and him getting banned from Twitter is probably long overdue.
But that's different to an intense, focused effort to stem particular conversations or views.
It's one thing if those views incite violence or hatred. It's just we seem to have people quite willing to - lack of a better term here - play God.
I put it in this thread as I didn't know where else to really put it.
James O'Keefe in the last decade-plus has been involved in numerous episodes of selective editing of audio/video, illegally entering Federal property, plotting to attempt to seduce and film a journalist to ruin her career and other examples of quality "journalism".
He's simply not credible.
The most popular social media sites were definitely not built to give people a voice. Thats what came off it.
Zuckerberg created his out of a site that rated coeds. He liked the idea that people could have a profile and others can react and or comment. He knew he could potentially make money from it too.
Same goes for twitter. Their platform wanted to be a more streamlined version of Zuckerberg's. They also realized earning potential.
Both sites are driven by power, earnings and share potential. Neither gave two fecks about free speech.
Actually read their terms and conditions and you will find out everything you post is their property. They can use your stuff and likeness etc....
With regards too facebook, unless you check a box which until 5 years ago didn't exist and 2 years ago had to be easier to find.
I know many of them in both companies and trust me the younger ones that joined much later tried and still try pushing back on thwir owners demands and expectations
Zuckerberg and dorsey are greedy swines who will go where money and trends take them. They don't care who they trample on. Months ago the visited and liked Trump now they ban him.
But both will point at their TOC when questioned.
- Status