Facebook frustrates advertisers as boycott over hate speech kicks off

[Crazy Alex]

 

 

27 minutes ago, Throatwobbler said:

And if we wanted anymore proof just read this by Crazy Alex.

 

This time he was so anxious to get into his rant about leftists he mention it in his 3rd word.  It really is sad but what else do you expect?

Any more proof of what?

[Crazy Alex]

 

14 minutes ago, OZinPattaya said:

The epidemic of demonitizing and shadow banning right-of-center channels on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube, apparently isn't enough. This is the end-game of the far Left--they actually want to legislate and criminalize certain forms of speech. Now, that's only disturbing to Americans, because we haven't committed that folly yet. The UK has. Go ahead and try to do this in YankeeLand. I suspect you'll get rather more resistance at the wrong end of a muzzle.

Leftists are funny creatures. Their ideas are so awesome, many have to be made mandatory. Their ideology is so solid and logic, they want to ban anything that doesn't go along. The truth is, the left would be NOWHERE without rigging the game at every opportunity: culture, news, social networking, etc. It really is a pathetic ideology.

[OZinPattaya]

8 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

Statements like this one, I find amusing. Remember when there used to be democrats and republicans? Now, most of the heavily indoctrinated members of the right, are using expressions like the far left, socialists, extremists, leftists, and other bizarre, and juvenile names when referring to a democratic voter. I do not call Republicans names. I do not need to, as my self esteem is high, and I am fine with who I am, what I believe in, and feel no need to demonize those of opposing views, which includes alot of good friends, and family. We all have to share the planet, right? I tend to call those on the opposite side of the aisle republicans, or the opposition. Civility is the essence of nobility, right? Just because others have hate in their hearts, does not mean we should feel compelled to reflect that vacuum of humanity, and embrace the heart of darkness. And when I do criticize the president, I typically make it a point NOT to criticize his followers. I get it. People feel differently about the issues. 

 

I am a democrat, and very, very proud of it. But, I am very centrist, as are the vast majority of Americans on the opposite side, of where you stand. 

This is a nice sentiment and I agree with it. I really wish the centrist voice was the significant one, but it isn't.  And I'd agree that most Americans are centrists. The problem is that the centrists aren't going to decide this battle. Currently there are only the radicals on the Left who have any voice. Soon, the right-wing radicals will inevitably assert themselves, if only to answer the excesses of the unopposed and mainstreamed Left. And where are the centrists going to be? They'll be in their living rooms watching everything on TV. Or posting in forums.

Edited July 2, 2020 by OZinPattaya

[Crazy Alex]

19 minutes ago, OZinPattaya said:

This is a nice sentiment and I agree with it. I really wish the centrist voice was the significant one, but it isn't.  And I'd agree that most Americans are centrists. The problem is that the centrists aren't going to decide this battle. Currently there are only the radicals on the Left who have any voice. Soon, the right-wing radicals will inevitably assert themselves, if only to answer the excesses of the unopposed and mainstreamed Left. And where are the centrists going to be? They'll be in their living rooms watching everything in TV. Or posting or forums.

I would say he's half right, as he left out the left's role in all of this. To @spidermike007, it's all that damn right wing causing the problem. To illustrate why I think he's wrong, I conducted an experiment. I did the following searches as typed below on Google:

 

"alt-right" cnn.com

This search term yielded 769,000 results.

 

"alt-left" cnn.com

This search term yielded 51,300 results, with the number 1 hit downplaying "alt-left" as a made up term.

 

Edited July 2, 2020 by Crazy Alex

[OZinPattaya]

4 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

I would say he's half right, as he left out the left's role in all of this. To @spidermike007, it's all that damn right wing causing the problem. To illustrate why I think he's wrong, I conducted an experiment. I did the following searches as typed here on Google:

 

"alt-right" cnn.com

This search term yielded 769,000 results.

 

"alt-left" cnn.com

This search term yielded 51,300 results, with the number 1 hit downplaying "alt-left" as a made up term.

 

There is no "radical left," apparently. Where are these centrist democrats? The left-wing media isn't even willing to acknowledge the mere existence of a radical element in its party. Meanwhile anyone who opposes the actual, living radical Left will be automatically branded radical right. Even if these people, like Rogan or Pool, are themselves self-avowed leftists.

[talahtnut]

I hate Facebook.    Whats gonna happen now?

[Crazy Alex]

1 minute ago, OZinPattaya said:

There is no "radical left," apparently. Where are these centrist democrats? The left-wing media isn't even willing to acknowledge the mere existence of a radical element in its party. Meanwhile anyone who opposes the actual, living radical Left will be automatically branded radical right. Even if these people, like Rogan or Pool, are themselves self-avowed leftists.

You got me to thinking more about this. If 8 years ago someone had told America that Nancy Pelosi would be the voice of reason and moderation for the Democrat party, most people would have said that you sir are insane.

And look at where we are now. Pelosi is now the voice of reason, with far-left kooks like AOC and Ihan Omar calling for insane policies like defunding the police, getting rid of cows, airplanes and retrofitting every building in America to *green* standards.

But no, how dare I or anyone else to the right of center put such labels on leftists. It is only they who can apply such labels to the right!

[OZinPattaya]

5 hours ago, pacovl46 said:

I don’t get it! People in the US are allowed to sport huge swastika tattoos publicly, protected by the the first amendment, i.e. free speech, which is ridiculous in my opinion, but saying on Facebook what you want is not allowed?! In my opinion, it should be either everything goes or nothing in that regard, but what’s going on there is cherry picking! 

You have a rather warped perception of America if you think it's the norm for the average Yank to saunter around proudly displaying a swastica on his shoulder. No better way to get the <deleted> beat out of you. I strongly suspect you personally have never spent 5 minutes in America. But yes, that is protected under US law. As it should be. As a Yank, I'm not proud of bigots in our midst, but I am proud that we fervently protect the rights of freedom of speech even when we detest the particular manifestation of that right. 

[torturedsole]

On 7/1/2020 at 12:41 PM, CorpusChristie said:

What exactly is "hate speech" ?

If I said 'I hate mushy peas' then it's bound to upset someone.  The upsetee then complains on social media and / or to the police that I've upset them beyond reproach by my extreme hatred of mushy peas.  The mushy peas are technically irrelevant as the only relevance is that I've said something to offend the upsetee.  

[Meat Pie 47]

On 7/1/2020 at 7:33 PM, khwaibah said:

F-U FB.????

Why?

[Crazy Alex]

3 minutes ago, torturedsole said:

If I said 'I hate mushy peas' then it's bound to upset someone.  The upsetee then complains on social media and / or to the police that I've upset them beyond reproach by my extreme hatred of mushy peas.  The mushy peas are technically irrelevant as the only relevance is that I've said something to offend the upsetee.  

You just reminded me of what I think is a classic real world example of what you just mentioned. A business had a lit up sign in their window that said "no man ever got shot doing the dishes". The BLM mob showed up, saying how offensive the sign was, protested the owner ripping down BLM propaganda taped to the door of HIS business and filming and saying the name and address of the business being targeted- ostensibly so the business can be vandalized or burned down to the ground for daring to display such a mean sign.

[dimitriv]

5 hours ago, Crazy Alex said:

It's simply leftist thinking. Leftists can't do ANYTHING without stacking the deck. From the media to moderating web sites (I'm not talking about TVF of course) to Facebook to counting votes, leftists simply cannot further their agenda without screwing people to the right of them in one way or another.

 

There's no leftish in the US. Even Democrats are right-wing...  You clearly have no idea what right-wing and left-wing means.

[Crazy Alex]

2 minutes ago, dimitriv said:

 

There's no leftish in the US. Even Democrats are right-wing...  You clearly have no idea what right-wing and left-wing means.

Yes, because Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is actually right wing! Oh please....

[dimitriv]

11 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

Yes, because Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is actually right wing! Oh please....

 

What makes her left-wing ?

 

Overall, the Democratic Party in the US is right-wing.

 

 

[OZinPattaya]

1 hour ago, talahtnut said:

I hate Facebook.    Whats gonna happen now?

Remove their protected status as public utilities. Open them up to endless class-action civil litigation. They have a choice: Be politically neutral public utilities, and enjoy the full protection from litigation under the law, or don't.

[samran]

6 hours ago, Throatwobbler said:

And if we wanted anymore proof just read this by Crazy Alex.

 

This time he was so anxious to get into his rant about leftists he mention it in his 3rd word.  It really is sad but what else do you expect?

They are strange beasts aren’t they? Basically anyone who they disagree with is a ‘leftist’. I always have a bit of a giggle when their posts come up. They are inanely predictable. 
 

Its a sad construct that has gained currency as the insult de jour for the reactionaries and other assorted chest thumpers who’s political ideology only goes as far as wrapping themselves in a flag yelling ‘my country right or wrong!’. Compassion? Forget about it! The past? The place to be!
 

These fellas call themselves free marketers but are really all about (as we see here) dictating to everyone their version of the truth. 

 

I’ve joked about it before, but for these guys, anyone to the left of Ghengis Khan is a ‘leftist’. 
 

 

Edited July 3, 2020 by samran

[pacovl46]

11 hours ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

They are allowed to say it on Facebook. There is no law saying they are not allowed. 

Who’s picking what cherries? 

I have a group on Facebook and you definitely cannot just post whatever you want because they have a policy against hate speech, amongst other things, which is perfectly fine with me, but, Facebook is an American company and the first amendment says you can say whatever you want, but now Facebook determines what can/can’t be said/allow themselves to be pressured into what is acceptable or not by companies, which is cherry picking in my opinion. Either you have the right to say what you want or you don’t, but in my opinion it shouldn’t be determined by Facebook or companies when there’s clearly a law that says otherwise. 

[pacovl46]

6 hours ago, OZinPattaya said:

You have a rather warped perception of America if you think it's the norm for the average Yank to saunter around proudly displaying a swastica on his shoulder. No better way to get the <deleted> beat out of you. I strongly suspect you personally have never spent 5 minutes in America. But yes, that is protected under US law. As it should be. As a Yank, I'm not proud of bigots in our midst, but I am proud that we fervently protect the rights of freedom of speech even when we detest the particular manifestation of that right. 

When did I say that I think it’s the norm for the average yank to sport massive swastika tattoos?! 
A friend of mine, an American, posted a pic of a guy at a lake with huge swastika tattoos on Facebook a while ago. When I asked him, if that’s legal he said yes, first amendment. 

[samran]

39 minutes ago, pacovl46 said:

Facebook is an American company and the first amendment says you can say whatever you want, but now Facebook determines what can/can’t be said/allow themselves to be pressured into what is acceptable or not by companies, which is cherry picking in my opinion.

The first amendment talks about the government, and what it can and can’t do. 

 

Facebook - as a platform - as an entity is perfectly within its rights to reject views it doesn’t fit within its own ethical boundaries. 

A bit like a Christian cake maker not wanting to make a cake celebrating a gay wedding. 

[welovesundaysatspace]

3 hours ago, pacovl46 said:

I have a group on Facebook and you definitely cannot just post whatever you want because they have a policy against hate speech, amongst other things, which is perfectly fine with me, but, Facebook is an American company and the first amendment says you can say whatever you want, but now Facebook determines what can/can’t be said/allow themselves to be pressured into what is acceptable or not by companies, which is cherry picking in my opinion.

No, the first amendment doesn’t apply to Facebook. It applies to the government. I can’t claim first amendment rights when you kick me out of your living room because my buddies and I wanted to sing our football chants there. And you also can’t claim first amendment rights when TVF is removing lese majeste posts. 
 

Thats why I asked who is picking what cherries because it seems you’re clearly mixing up different whos and cherries. 
 

Quote

Either you have the right to say what you want or you don’t, but in my opinion it shouldn’t be determined by Facebook or companies when there’s clearly a law that says otherwise. 

You have the right to say what you want. And Facebook has the right to have their own policies. And there’s no law saying that Facebook need to let you post on their platform whatever you want. Same as TVF and you and me have. 

Edited July 3, 2020 by welovesundaysatspace

[Monomial]

19 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

Statements like this one, I find amusing. Remember when there used to be democrats and republicans? Now, most of the heavily indoctrinated members of the right, are using expressions like the far left, socialists, extremists, leftists, and other bizarre, and juvenile names when referring to a democratic voter. I do not call Republicans names. I do not need to, as my self esteem is high, and I am fine with who I am, what I believe in, and feel no need to demonize those of opposing views, which includes alot of good friends, and family. We all have to share the planet, right? I tend to call those on the opposite side of the aisle republicans, or the opposition. Civility is the essence of nobility, right? Just because others have hate in their hearts, does not mean we should feel compelled to reflect that vacuum of humanity, and embrace the heart of darkness. And when I do criticize the president, I typically make it a point NOT to criticize his followers. I get it. People feel differently about the issues. 

 

I am a democrat, and very, very proud of it. But, I am very centrist, as are the vast majority of Americans on the opposite side, of where you stand. 

 

I have a problem with the word "centrist", because it has no genuine meaning.  It only works if you assume all political belief can be defined by a line with a specific beginning of "far left" and a specific end of "far right". You can then define a midpoint of "center".

 

In reality, politics doesn't look like that. Instead, it is some kind of convoluted, multidimensional hypersphere, with people on the extreme left and those on the extreme right actually sharing much more in common than they are willing to admit. Seen this way, everyone is a "centrist".  There is no objective center that everyone can agree on. Personal biases always define this point, which is why nearly everyone considers themselves "centrists", even those who are very right biased or very left biased in the colloquial sense. 

 

There are other more appropriate words, such as "liberal" and "conservative".  These had meanings at one point in time. But in today's political environment, those who are liberal don't actually want to liberate anything. Instead they want to restrict freedoms in favor of more government control. Similarly, there is no intent of conserving by the conservatives. They are actually trying to actively expand the government policies supporting corporate welfare over the individual.

 

Words change over time, but human biases remain. We are all biased. Saying we are centrist is simply a way of avoiding facing our own biases and avoiding accepting the uncomfortable biases of others. I have a problem with the word "centrist" because it is usually a substitute for the intended meaning "reasonable and not radical". And yet, in the correct context, we are all radical thinkers with deeply held convictions that we would never compromise on.

 

I am neither right, left, nor centrist. I find anyone that self identifies and is proud to be a Democrat or a Republican quite radical to be honest.

 

 

 

[spidermike007]

13 hours ago, Throatwobbler said:

Crazy Alex. You do understand that with this post you have just prooven SpiderMike to be totally correct. 

 

I guess I should give you some credit that you had to wait until your fourth sentence until you went into your usual leftist this leftist that rant.

 

I honestly do not think that you could have done a better job to proove SpiderMike right.

 

Bravo Crazy Alex, Bravo

Thank you. What I was saying exactly. And what Crazy Alex does not seem to understand, is that as individuals we can hold ourselves to a far higher standard than the media. We can behave with honor, dignity and respect, and refrain from mindless name calling. Blaming the media is sheer deflection, and the total inability to take responsibility for ones actions. 

[spidermike007]

1 hour ago, Monomial said:

 

I have a problem with the word "centrist", because it has no genuine meaning.  It only works if you assume all political belief can be defined by a line with a specific beginning of "far left" and a specific end of "far right". You can then define a midpoint of "center".

 

In reality, politics doesn't look like that. Instead, it is some kind of convoluted, multidimensional hypersphere, with people on the extreme left and those on the extreme right actually sharing much more in common than they are willing to admit. Seen this way, everyone is a "centrist".  There is no objective center that everyone can agree on. Personal biases always define this point, which is why nearly everyone considers themselves "centrists", even those who are very right biased or very left biased in the colloquial sense. 

 

There are other more appropriate words, such as "liberal" and "conservative".  These had meanings at one point in time. But in today's political environment, those who are liberal don't actually want to liberate anything. Instead they want to restrict freedoms in favor of more government control. Similarly, there is no intent of conserving by the conservatives. They are actually trying to actively expand the government policies supporting corporate welfare over the individual.

 

Words change over time, but human biases remain. We are all biased. Saying we are centrist is simply a way of avoiding facing our own biases and avoiding accepting the uncomfortable biases of others. I have a problem with the word "centrist" because it is usually a substitute for the intended meaning "reasonable and not radical". And yet, in the correct context, we are all radical thinkers with deeply held convictions that we would never compromise on.

 

I am neither right, left, nor centrist. I find anyone that self identifies and is proud to be a Democrat or a Republican quite radical to be honest.

 

 

 

Do you also object to the term moderate? Though I do identify as a Democrat, I am most definitely not liberal, as most on the right prefer to cast us. Or demonize us. Frankly, I have no idea what they are trying to say, and my guess is the majority on the right do not either. 

[tlandtday]

2 hours ago, Monomial said:

 

I have a problem with the word "centrist", because it has no genuine meaning.  It only works if you assume all political belief can be defined by a line with a specific beginning of "far left" and a specific end of "far right". You can then define a midpoint of "center".

 

In reality, politics doesn't look like that. Instead, it is some kind of convoluted, multidimensional hypersphere, with people on the extreme left and those on the extreme right actually sharing much more in common than they are willing to admit. Seen this way, everyone is a "centrist".  There is no objective center that everyone can agree on. Personal biases always define this point, which is why nearly everyone considers themselves "centrists", even those who are very right biased or very left biased in the colloquial sense. 

 

There are other more appropriate words, such as "liberal" and "conservative".  These had meanings at one point in time. But in today's political environment, those who are liberal don't actually want to liberate anything. Instead they want to restrict freedoms in favor of more government control. Similarly, there is no intent of conserving by the conservatives. They are actually trying to actively expand the government policies supporting corporate welfare over the individual.

 

Words change over time, but human biases remain. We are all biased. Saying we are centrist is simply a way of avoiding facing our own biases and avoiding accepting the uncomfortable biases of others. I have a problem with the word "centrist" because it is usually a substitute for the intended meaning "reasonable and not radical". And yet, in the correct context, we are all radical thinkers with deeply held convictions that we would never compromise on.

 

I am neither right, left, nor centrist. I find anyone that self identifies and is proud to be a Democrat or a Republican quite radical to be honest.

 

 

 

Good points people have been suckered into this left/right paradigm. If one disagrees with them they must be either a radical right wing or left winger.  For the most part when it comes to political parties they are basically same excrement different pile.  They are organized to suppress and sucker those below them.  What is needed is independents not chained to a top down ruling elite.  

Forget the "my party is better than your party" nonsense and internally ask and answer the simple question "am I a good human being?"

Edited July 3, 2020 by tlandtday

[Morch]

1 hour ago, spidermike007 said:

Thank you. What I was saying exactly. And what Crazy Alex does not seem to understand, is that as individuals we can hold ourselves to a far higher standard than the media. We can behave with honor, dignity and respect, and refrain from mindless name calling. Blaming the media is sheer deflection, and the total inability to take responsibility for ones actions. 

 

Those living in glass houses....

[spidermike007]

7 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Those living in glass houses....

I always hold the supporters to a higher standard that the leaders. Supporters, regardless of which party they support, are people. People deserve more credit than leaders and are capable of greater honor. 

 

Leaders of either party are reptiles. Some are 8 ft. and some are 14 ft. I always maintain awareness of that. 

[Morch]

4 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

I always hold the supporters to a higher standard that the leaders. Supporters, regardless of which party they support, are people. People deserve more credit than leaders and are capable of greater honor. 

 

Leaders of either party are reptiles. Some are 8 ft. and some are 14 ft. I always maintain awareness of that. 

 

My comment was more to do with practice what you preach etc.

[Crazy Alex]

On 7/3/2020 at 4:37 AM, spidermike007 said:

I always hold the supporters to a higher standard that the leaders. Supporters, regardless of which party they support, are people. People deserve more credit than leaders and are capable of greater honor. 

 

Leaders of either party are reptiles. Some are 8 ft. and some are 14 ft. I always maintain awareness of that. 

Ah yes those higher standards of yours:

 

"Frankly, I have no idea what they are trying to say, and my guess is the majority on the right do not either."

 

????????????

[OZinPattaya]

On 7/2/2020 at 7:54 PM, pacovl46 said:

I have a group on Facebook and you definitely cannot just post whatever you want because they have a policy against hate speech, amongst other things, which is perfectly fine with me, but, Facebook is an American company and the first amendment says you can say whatever you want, but now Facebook determines what can/can’t be said/allow themselves to be pressured into what is acceptable or not by companies, which is cherry picking in my opinion. Either you have the right to say what you want or you don’t, but in my opinion it shouldn’t be determined by Facebook or companies when there’s clearly a law that says otherwise. 

Exactly. All of these social media giants are American companies, and yet none of them observe the strictures of the 1st Amendment. Now, in all fairness, as private companies, they're not required to. But that doesn't mean they shouldn't. These companies are themselves being protected under the 1st Amendment, by virtue of being American companies. Would you not think they would extend the same rights and courtesies to the American populace? To their own subscribers? If so, you'd be wrong. While under the aegis of the 1st Amendment they operate under their own dictatorial rule. Hence, the American people need to rise up and remove their protected utility status. Let the class-action vultures, most of whom are left-wing and all mercenaries, smell blood and go after the technocrats.

[torturedsole]

Facebook. Jeez.  They're doomed and we all know it.  Can't carry on forever and a new kid on the block will arrive soonish.  Social media evolution isn't my cup of tea but can see where this is heading and Facebook will not hold a monopoly in the not too distant future.  

 

People don't want their apps to be predisposed to political leanings.  Simple.