- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Twitter at it again: "Unplanned" movie Twitter acct temporarily suspended
Posted on 3/31/19 at 10:13 am to TH03
Posted on 3/31/19 at 10:13 am to TH03
quote:
Twitter is a private company...
They suck, but they can do this stuff.
1. That’s beside the point. It isn’t a question of whether they can, it’s a question of whether they should.
2. It’s also not so black and white as to whether they can. You see, they claim they are a platform and are not responsible for what their users post. But if they are shaping the narrative and dialogue on their site by promoting certain tweets/ideas and banning or shadow-banning others, they are not just a platform anymore. They are actively involved in advocacy.
3. Twitter claiming they are a neutral “platform” instead of a publisher removes them from the legal liabilities that publishers deal with. If they were truly neutral, they’d have a point. But Twitter is trying to have its cake and eat it to. They are trying to shape dialogue like a publisher while still claiming they are a neutral platform. There are legal issues here, and it will be hashed out at some point. So even though they are a private company, whether they “can” do what they want is still up in the air.
This post was edited on 3/31/19 at 10:20 am
0
Posted on 3/31/19 at 10:13 am to Mr Perfect
That may be correct in the political philosophy sense but it’s absolutely incorrect regarding US Monopoly laws. I will remind you that Google controls the platform and colludes on a daily basis to bury all competition to the market segment “leader” in favor of Twitter and in defense of one specific political party and political perspective.
We have the entire history of Antitrust Law ( see television , radio, telecommunications etc ) to indicate where this is headed. Their refusal to allow dissent from the Progressive Orthodoxy will be their undoing. They know this even if you don’t , which is why they have legal teams issuing urgent statements about “ non- discrimination “ that make us laugh out loud they are such bullshite.
We have the entire history of Antitrust Law ( see television , radio, telecommunications etc ) to indicate where this is headed. Their refusal to allow dissent from the Progressive Orthodoxy will be their undoing. They know this even if you don’t , which is why they have legal teams issuing urgent statements about “ non- discrimination “ that make us laugh out loud they are such bullshite.
Posted on 3/31/19 at 10:21 am to Lsupimp
While I take your meaning, I think you're oversimplifying a complicated issue of federal law by suggesting their post hoc censorship is equivalent to making them a publisher of all the comments they don't remove.
Fox has great ratings, why hasn't someone started a censorship free Twitter competitor? There's a market out there apparently...
And acording to your Monopoly logic, Walmart should be controlled by the state too, right?
Bernie would love to force them to give everyone $15 per hour. Socialism, yay!
Fox has great ratings, why hasn't someone started a censorship free Twitter competitor? There's a market out there apparently...
And acording to your Monopoly logic, Walmart should be controlled by the state too, right?
Bernie would love to force them to give everyone $15 per hour. Socialism, yay!
This post was edited on 3/31/19 at 10:25 am
Posted on 3/31/19 at 10:22 am to TOSOV
FoxNews used to Tweet a hundred times a day.
They abruptly stopped tweeting anything back in November.
They abruptly stopped tweeting anything back in November.
Posted on 3/31/19 at 10:25 am to Mr Perfect
quote:
Walmart would be controlled by the State
Reductio ad absurdum.
Posted on 3/31/19 at 10:27 am to Lsupimp
Funny how not a single one that quickly came out with the "private biz can do whatever" comments have no response to the "unless you bake cakes" responses. Cowards.
Posted on 3/31/19 at 10:28 am to TH03
But yet that baker out west has to make cake for the gays and trans or he gets taken to court. Frick Twitter.
Posted on 3/31/19 at 10:28 am to Lsupimp
LMAO
Zero tweets have been tweeted without somebody having needed to sign up for a twitter account beforehand.
Signing up for a twitter account requires you to agree to limits placed on what you are allowed to say.
Conservatives need to stop the hypocrisy
Zero tweets have been tweeted without somebody having needed to sign up for a twitter account beforehand.
Signing up for a twitter account requires you to agree to limits placed on what you are allowed to say.
Conservatives need to stop the hypocrisy
Posted on 3/31/19 at 10:29 am to Mr Perfect
quote:
Conservatives whining about private companies making private decisions Really such a dumb collection of individuals
I hope a conservative beats your arse. If you’re a male democrat you’re either gay or on welfare
Posted on 3/31/19 at 10:30 am to TH03
This post reminds me of Christian bake shop who refused to bake the homos a cake.
Posted on 3/31/19 at 10:32 am to el Gaucho
Post of the year
Posted on 3/31/19 at 10:33 am to East Coast Band
quote:I’ve read that Fox News is protesting Twitter because of how they handled Tucker Carlson being doxxed on their site.
FoxNews used to Tweet a hundred times a day. They abruptly stopped tweeting anything back in November.
So Fox is choosing not to tweet.
Posted on 3/31/19 at 10:33 am to TOSOV
Twitter should be able to do this as a private company. But they champion themselves as giving a voice to everyone so censoring someone for being on one side of a very split topic is hypocritical
Posted on 3/31/19 at 10:35 am to guedeaux
quote:
to keep it on the straight and arrow.
What a dummy. The term is “straightened arrow”
Posted on 3/31/19 at 10:37 am to Mr Perfect
quote:
Conservatives whining about private companies making private decisions
As a conservative, I agree.
quote:
Really such a dumb collection of individuals
Now kindly go frick yourself.
Posted on 3/31/19 at 10:38 am to Mr Perfect
quote:
limits placed on what you are allowed to say
Exactly. Which makes it even more egregious that Twitter continues to ban Normals/Conservatives who have broken no Twitter rules. Because some Progressive Twitter hall monitor wants to create arbitrary rules to discriminate against specific widely- held, even majority opinions offered by specific individuals who has broken no Twitter rules.
Posted on 3/31/19 at 10:40 am to TOSOV
quote:
Funny how not a single one that quickly came out with the "private biz can do whatever" comments have no response to the "unless you bake cakes" responses. Cowards.
Whataboutism at its finest.
I think it'd pathetic to beg and plead for regulation of Twitter.
I also think the cake ruling is complete bullshite.
Posted on 3/31/19 at 10:40 am to Tdot_RiverDawg
They don’t have to bake a cake at all but if they are a business open to the public they can’t just sell to white people, or to black peoples, to straight people, or to gay people.
A baker who advertises and serves the general public, even as a member of the church, is operating as a business and shouldn’t be allowed to discriminate services based on religious beliefs. This seems like common sense to me, especially because none of us would want to regularly be refused things available to other people because something is different about us. We’ve dealt with that in the past in our country.
A baker who advertises and serves the general public, even as a member of the church, is operating as a business and shouldn’t be allowed to discriminate services based on religious beliefs. This seems like common sense to me, especially because none of us would want to regularly be refused things available to other people because something is different about us. We’ve dealt with that in the past in our country.
Posted on 3/31/19 at 10:46 am to Mr Perfect
Yeah but that's not how the cake deal went down. The baker sold cakes without discrimination. He simply wouldn't make a custom cake for a gay wedding. There is a difference.
Posted on 3/31/19 at 10:46 am to slackster
quote:
also think the cake ruling is complete bullshite.
Wow dude. Just when I put you as my #1 poster you say this? SMH
Baking a cake is relatively minor but it sets a dangerous precedent. Can an ambulance driver refuse to help a gay person on religious grounds? Can restaurants begin to refuse minorities, as they did in the 1950’s as long as they cite a similar reason? It’s a slippery slope.
Page 3 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News