- 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: Tim Poole responds to “muh private company” defense of social media giants
Posted on 5/5/19 at 4:43 pm to I B Freeman
Posted on 5/5/19 at 4:43 pm to I B Freeman
Were u a fan of Obama’s dictatorial 8 years?
1
Posted on 5/5/19 at 4:44 pm to Upperdecker
Trust laws should not be used politically AND there is no possible way Facebook is a monopoly. Have you ever bought online advertising???
Posted on 5/5/19 at 4:45 pm to I B Freeman
quote:
Why would a company whose business is selling advertising want to run off users???
Because they have the desire and ability to control elections.
Obviously.
Posted on 5/5/19 at 4:46 pm to xiv
quote:
The running of a business is not the practicing of a religion. If it was, it would be unconstitutional to tax businesses.
Forcing some one to engage in a business activity that violates their religious freedom IS unconstitutional. Practicing religious beliefs doesn't mean only in your house or church.
Posted on 5/5/19 at 4:47 pm to ProbyOne
So they run folks off as a way to control elections??
What does control elections mean??? Do they brainwash you into voting one way or another?
What does control elections mean??? Do they brainwash you into voting one way or another?
Posted on 5/5/19 at 4:48 pm to Kino74
quote:...does not happen.
Forcing some one to engage in a business activity
Posted on 5/5/19 at 4:52 pm to I B Freeman
quote:
What does control elections mean??? Do they brainwash you into voting one way or another?
What do you mean by brainwash? As in you don't know what you don't know?
If you don't understand the power of information then I'm not sure what to say.
Posted on 5/5/19 at 4:53 pm to oogabooga68
No nor LBJs and I damn sure do not want them to have this power you want them to have.
You are a fool if you do.
You are a fool if you do.
Posted on 5/5/19 at 4:55 pm to ProbyOne
The power of what information??
I am not so blind and so simple minded that I worship politicians and want to give them dictatorial power if that what you mean.
I am not so blind and so simple minded that I worship politicians and want to give them dictatorial power if that what you mean.
Posted on 5/5/19 at 4:57 pm to ProbyOne
Are you saying Facebook will not take money from conservatives wishing to advertise there??
If so you are wrong and I have personal experience in that regard.
If so you are wrong and I have personal experience in that regard.
This post was edited on 5/5/19 at 4:59 pm
Posted on 5/5/19 at 5:13 pm to I B Freeman
quote:
If Facebook dropped every conservative on their site or every liberal I would not care.
Why should I?
Because conservatives would have a hard time ever winning an election again. I think you’d care about that right?
Posted on 5/5/19 at 5:17 pm to DallasTiger11
Why? Do you think Facebook would have the same audience it has today if it banned all conservatives??
Why would you think that?
My conservative friends and family can think for themselves.
Why would you think that?
My conservative friends and family can think for themselves.
Posted on 5/5/19 at 5:19 pm to I B Freeman
You boys let me know when a conservative can’t spend money on Facebook advertising.
Posted on 5/5/19 at 5:25 pm to I B Freeman
quote:
I am not so blind and so simple minded that I worship politicians and want to give them dictatorial power if that what you mean.
Neither am I.
But you seem ok with having an oligarchy with the power to control information, narratives, and therefore public opinion and elections. As long as its under the guise of "free market"?
Facebook didn't pull the recent wave of people (infowars, milo, farrakhan, etc.) because they were losing ad revenue fyi... so why did they do it given that it had no impact on their bottom line?
Posted on 5/5/19 at 5:40 pm to ProbyOne
Bottom line is Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube ban conservative opinions. Spreading the truth via social media and bypassing fake news media was a big reason Trump won. Banning conservative opinions is election meddling. The social media giants are colluding to alter the results of upcoming elections.
Posted on 5/5/19 at 5:41 pm to xiv
quote:
..does not happen.
Those bakers who refused to make a gay wedding cake would disagree.
Posted on 5/5/19 at 5:44 pm to Stingray
Freeman, censoring Facebook is like censoring a text message. A private company owns the phone and the ap.
Posted on 5/5/19 at 5:47 pm to Kino74
quote:They opened their business voluntarily.
Those bakers who refused to make a gay wedding cake would disagree.
Your argument won't work. Running a business is not a right protected by the First Amendment. You have to follow rules to run a business.
Posted on 5/5/19 at 5:59 pm to FlexDawg
quote:
private company
Pentagon Kills LifeLog Project
This happened the VERY same day that Facebook was born.
Coincidence? I doubt it.
This post was edited on 5/5/19 at 6:15 pm
Posted on 5/5/19 at 6:01 pm to Kino74
quote:
Those bakers who refused to make a gay wedding cake would disagree
While state law considered homosexuals a protected class, which changes the analysis, your overall point is correct.
Businesses are protected by the first amendment.
Hobby lobby case (Suoreme court decision):
We must decide in these cases whether the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA), 107Stat. 1488, 42 U. S. C. §2000bb et seq., permits the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to demand that three closely held corporations provide health-insurance coverage for methods of contraception that violate the sincerely held religious beliefs of the companies’ owners. We hold that the regulations that impose this obligation violate RFRA, which prohibits the Federal Government from taking any action that substantially burdens the exercise of religion unless that action constitutes the least restrictive means of serving a compelling government interest
This post was edited on 5/5/19 at 6:02 pm
Page 3 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News