Internet Platform Removals, i.e. Alex Jones

in reality, all of this has been a total load of old bollocks

Is it right for them to strike Alex Jones from their platfoms

Right
9
75%
Wrong
1
8%
Not sure
2
17%
 
Total votes: 12

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 15085
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Internet Platform Removals, i.e. Alex Jones

Postby Jimbo » 09 Aug 2018, 08:49

I touched upon this in the Fake News thread but this push back has become an issue all on its own with free speech and - IMO - government and corporate cover ups at issue.

I've never been a big Facebook or Twitter follower. I've never sought out or read a news story on FB or Twitter but rather go to sites which often cite them where someone like Caitlin Johnstone will post Tweets and make comment. For my info needs I go directly to various sites or I go to YouTube and iTunes podcasts. While Jones's plight is a big story with his ban from all the big platforms, I find what is happening in iTunes podcasts troubling. Scott Horton, an anti-war libertarian ... mostly, who interviews a lot of folks who debunk war and political narratives, for some months now comes up in my iTunes with an exclamation mark in a circle meaning it is unavailable. Technical problem? Then yesterday when checking one podcast I infrequently frequent, The Mind Renewed with Julian Charles, a sweet English Christian who discusses Christ a lot but sometimes goes into 9/11 type stories, well, his iTunes site now has the exclamation mark. My Jimbo is tingling.

Do you have any issues like this with your internet? Are you concerned this may be the slippery slope to more and more online censorship?
Gadfly

User avatar
The Modernist
2018 BCB Cup Champ!
Posts: 11459
Joined: 13 Apr 2014, 20:42

Re: Internet Platform Removals, i.e. Alex Jones

Postby The Modernist » 09 Aug 2018, 09:59

His pods were removed for hate speech apparently. It is always tricky to know at what point the principle of freedom of speech should be curbed, unless you're a complete libertarian who says"anything goes". I know Jones is a ranting idiot cynically exploiting the gullible for his own ends, but that isn't a reason for banning of course.
Whether this was justified in this particular instance I don't know, but I would say this kind of thing is a concern because we've now got a lot of information being controlled by a small handful of hugely powerful companies. That's very dangerous.

User avatar
Goat Boy
Bogarting the joint
Posts: 32148
Joined: 20 Mar 2007, 12:11
Location: In the perfumed garden

Re: Internet Platform Removals, i.e. Alex Jones

Postby Goat Boy » 09 Aug 2018, 11:27

With Jones it's also the fact that his continued lies about the victims of massacres and their families being actors etc is actually leading to the abuse of these people.
Griff wrote:The notion that Jeremy Corbyn, a lifelong vocal proponent of antisemitism, would stand in front of an antisemitic mural and commend it is utterly preposterous.


Copehead wrote:we have lost touch with anything normal

User avatar
CAN
hounds people off the board
Posts: 17608
Joined: 24 Apr 2007, 23:21
Location: pursued by the enraged queen

Re: Internet Platform Removals, i.e. Alex Jones

Postby CAN » 09 Aug 2018, 11:30

The Modernist wrote:I know Jones is a ranting idiot cynically exploiting the gullible for his own ends, but that isn't a reason for banning of course.


I'd say it is. I don't have much time for the libertarian attitude you outlined in your post. Ban fuckers like Jones from public platforms, let the cunt fume and bubble in his own little world.
mission wrote:the self-satisfied smug cunts like that moron Copehead

User avatar
The Prof
Composing a revolutionary symphony
Posts: 45044
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 18:32
Location: A Metropolis of Discontent

Re: Internet Platform Removals, i.e. Alex Jones

Postby The Prof » 09 Aug 2018, 11:33

Surely we can have a wide range of political debate and still keep within the Terms & Conditions of the social media provider.

User avatar
The Red Heifer
Fucking Crackers
Posts: 14672
Joined: 31 Aug 2003, 01:28
Location: South Penriff
Contact:

Re: Internet Platform Removals, i.e. Alex Jones

Postby The Red Heifer » 09 Aug 2018, 11:49

Goat Boy wrote:With Jones it's also the fact that his continued lies about the victims of massacres and their families being actors etc is actually leading to the abuse of these people.


Well thats it isnt it? This fruitcake is tapping into an audience who wants to disbelieve, be it the false flag theory with Sandy Hook, Pizzagate etc. He is inciting violence and harassment with his "entertainment" (because he's an entertainer don't you know), and if suppressing this guys words (which he obviously doesn't believe himself as he tried to throw his career under the bus so he could see his kids) stops that then so be it. Don't say patently false shit about murdered children and you might have a leg to stand on.

We're having a thing like this down here atm. Our Sky News Australia network is by day a normal news network with some excellent journalists with a few partisan commentators thrown in. After dark however it turns into Dingo Fox News, with all the hideous creatures too heinous for the daytime coming out with the most awful of shit. It was in this scenario that former Northern Territory Chief Minister turned raving lunatic with a camera in his face for some reason Adam Giles had white supremacist and self-styled Nazi Blair Cottrell on to JUST CHAT ABOUT SHIT. Shit rightly hit the fan with even some of the Sky Daytime Normies expressing their revulsion and disgust. Anyway today the Victorian Govt (already disliked by the Right for being progressive) yanked Sky from their train station TV's as a response. So yeah today has been about censorship here.
Wadesmith wrote:Why is it that when there's a 'What do you think of this?' post, it's always absolute cobblers?

User avatar
The Modernist
2018 BCB Cup Champ!
Posts: 11459
Joined: 13 Apr 2014, 20:42

Re: Internet Platform Removals, i.e. Alex Jones

Postby The Modernist » 09 Aug 2018, 14:37

The Velvet Underground wrote:
The Modernist wrote:I know Jones is a ranting idiot cynically exploiting the gullible for his own ends, but that isn't a reason for banning of course.


I'd say it is. I don't have much time for the libertarian attitude you outlined in your post. Ban fuckers like Jones from public platforms, let the cunt fume and bubble in his own little world.


It isn't - you can't ban people because you don't like them!

Of course this wasn't the reason given for removing his podcasts, they were removed because they were thought to contain hate speech. Having not heard the offending pods, I can't say whether that reason is correct or not.

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 15085
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: Internet Platform Removals, i.e. Alex Jones

Postby Jimbo » 09 Aug 2018, 15:13

The Modernist wrote:
The Velvet Underground wrote:
The Modernist wrote:I know Jones is a ranting idiot cynically exploiting the gullible for his own ends, but that isn't a reason for banning of course.


I'd say it is. I don't have much time for the libertarian attitude you outlined in your post. Ban fuckers like Jones from public platforms, let the cunt fume and bubble in his own little world.


It isn't - you can't ban people because you don't like them!

Of course this wasn't the reason given for removing his podcasts, they were removed because they were thought to contain hate speech. Having not heard the offending pods, I can't say whether that reason is correct or not.


Jones was certainly old school antisemitic from time to time but that wasn't why he was banned either. There is blatant antisemitism all over the internet and those sites aren't shut down by the platform overlords. They usually leave it up to the individual site owners to determine how much hate is tolerable. Which is good. Offended here go elsewhere.

No, this is all related to Russiagate and it won't stop with Jones. The internet is going too far fucking up government narratives. Like Putin controlling his oligarchs the US/UK government is now asking its newly-made rich internet oligarchs for some reciprocation. Make. It. Stop.
Gadfly

User avatar
CAN
hounds people off the board
Posts: 17608
Joined: 24 Apr 2007, 23:21
Location: pursued by the enraged queen

Re: Internet Platform Removals, i.e. Alex Jones

Postby CAN » 09 Aug 2018, 15:48

The Modernist wrote:
The Velvet Underground wrote:
The Modernist wrote:I know Jones is a ranting idiot cynically exploiting the gullible for his own ends, but that isn't a reason for banning of course.


I'd say it is. I don't have much time for the libertarian attitude you outlined in your post. Ban fuckers like Jones from public platforms, let the cunt fume and bubble in his own little world.


It isn't - you can't ban people because you don't like them!


Oh - I'd never thought of that, G! :roll:

And if you don't like them because they spread all kinds of falsehoods and cause all sorts of problems for innocent people?
mission wrote:the self-satisfied smug cunts like that moron Copehead

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 23620
Joined: 05 Jan 2006, 02:55
Location: Applebees

Re: Internet Platform Removals, i.e. Alex Jones

Postby Davey the Fat Boy » 09 Aug 2018, 16:24

There is no “free speech” issue here. The first amendment guarantees that the government will not ban you. But Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, iTunes and all of the other platforms mentioned on this thread are privately owned, and therefore have the right to decide what content they present and/or amplify.

I think they all took far too long determining that Alex Jones was a toxic presence on our media landscape, and I hope that their conscience continues to guide them in a similar direction with others like him.
Last edited by Davey the Fat Boy on 09 Aug 2018, 16:30, edited 1 time in total.
The opinions of this poster are subjective. That’s how opinions work.

Image

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 15085
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: Internet Platform Removals, i.e. Alex Jones

Postby Jimbo » 09 Aug 2018, 16:24



Not banned yet from YouTube, but Van Buren, a former US diplomat and Iraq war and media critic has recently been lifetime banned from Twitter for being ... Well, this guy is no Alex Jones and the interview is an eyeopener for any of you who think banning is appropriate in any fashion.
Last edited by Jimbo on 09 Aug 2018, 16:27, edited 1 time in total.
Gadfly

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 15085
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: Internet Platform Removals, i.e. Alex Jones

Postby Jimbo » 09 Aug 2018, 16:26

Davey the Fat Boy wrote:There is no “free speech” issue here. The first amendment guarantees that the government will not ban you. But Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, iTunes and all of the other platforms mentioned on this thread are privately owned, and therefore have the right to decide what content they present and/or amplify.

I think they all took far too long determining that Alex Jones was a toxic presence on our medi landscape, and I hope that their conscience continues to guide them in a similar direction with others like him.


You tell 'em, Granny!
Gadfly

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 23620
Joined: 05 Jan 2006, 02:55
Location: Applebees

Re: Internet Platform Removals, i.e. Alex Jones

Postby Davey the Fat Boy » 09 Aug 2018, 16:29

Yeah...it’s so unhip to be precise about what censorship is.
The opinions of this poster are subjective. That’s how opinions work.

Image

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 15085
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: Internet Platform Removals, i.e. Alex Jones

Postby Jimbo » 09 Aug 2018, 16:42

Davey the Fat Boy wrote: I think they all took far too long determining that Alex Jones was a toxic presence on our media landscape...


To be fair you do make a good point here, Davey. Now, use a little imagination, think about what's going on and then speculate why now?

Also, I'll argue that FB and Google are not exactly private companies. They make oodles of cash from tax dollars and for such shouldn't they adhere to government standards like colleges which receive money and must adhere to gender fairness rules or lose the money?


Former FBI agent says tech companies must “silence” sources of “rebellion”
By Andre Damon
1 November 2017

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2017/1 ... g-n01.html
Last edited by Jimbo on 09 Aug 2018, 17:00, edited 1 time in total.
Gadfly

User avatar
Count Machuki
BCB Cup Champion 2013
Posts: 37912
Joined: 11 Jun 2005, 15:28
Location: ~84 bpm

Re: Internet Platform Removals, i.e. Alex Jones

Postby Count Machuki » 09 Aug 2018, 16:50

Jimbo wrote:
Also, I'll argue that FB and Google are not exactly private companies.



:?
Let U be the set of all united sets, K be the set of the kids and D be the set of things divided.
Then it follows that ∀ k ∈ K: K ∈ U ⇒ k ∉ D

User avatar
The Modernist
2018 BCB Cup Champ!
Posts: 11459
Joined: 13 Apr 2014, 20:42

Re: Internet Platform Removals, i.e. Alex Jones

Postby The Modernist » 09 Aug 2018, 17:29

The Velvet Underground wrote:
The Modernist wrote:
The Velvet Underground wrote:
I'd say it is. I don't have much time for the libertarian attitude you outlined in your post. Ban fuckers like Jones from public platforms, let the cunt fume and bubble in his own little world.


It isn't - you can't ban people because you don't like them!


Oh - I'd never thought of that, G! :roll:

And if you don't like them because they spread all kinds of falsehoods and cause all sorts of problems for innocent people?


It's complicated isn't it? I'm not defending him at all, but you have to get to the specifics - are the particular comments defamatory, would they incite racial hatred etc.

User avatar
The Modernist
2018 BCB Cup Champ!
Posts: 11459
Joined: 13 Apr 2014, 20:42

Re: Internet Platform Removals, i.e. Alex Jones

Postby The Modernist » 09 Aug 2018, 17:35

Davey the Fat Boy wrote:There is no “free speech” issue here. The first amendment guarantees that the government will not ban you. But Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, iTunes and all of the other platforms mentioned on this thread are privately owned, and therefore have the right to decide what content they present and/or amplify.
.


Is it quite that simple Davey? Privately owned yes, but they depend on user generated content so it's not quite the same thing as a newspaper or television channel which have professionally created content that has been specifically commissioned. Furthermore they now have such a monopoly on what's being viewed or consumed on the net, that it is potentially a problem if they start deciding what views can or can't be heard.
Just to make clear, I'm not saying they were wrong in this instance as I don't know enough about the particulars of this case.

User avatar
Hizzoner
Posts: 4
Joined: 02 Feb 2016, 16:21
Location: The Bench

Re: Internet Platform Removals, i.e. Alex Jones

Postby Hizzoner » 09 Aug 2018, 17:52

The Modernist wrote:
Davey the Fat Boy wrote:There is no “free speech” issue here. The first amendment guarantees that the government will not ban you. But Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, iTunes and all of the other platforms mentioned on this thread are privately owned, and therefore have the right to decide what content they present and/or amplify.
.


Is it quite that simple Davey? Privately owned yes, but they depend on user generated content so it's not quite the same thing as a newspaper or television channel which have professionally created content that has been specifically commissioned. Furthermore they now have such a monopoly on what's being viewed or consumed on the net, that it is potentially a problem if they start deciding what views can or can't be heard.
Just to make clear, I'm not saying they were wrong in this instance as I don't know enough about the particulars of this case.


As a matter of American law, it is quite that simple. The First Amendment free speech protection (and, everything guaranteed by the Bill of Rights) protects people against governmental action. So the actions of non-governmental actors may raise amorphous notions of "free speech," but that is irrelevant as a matter of law and "rights."
Grasp the nettle!

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 15085
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: Internet Platform Removals, i.e. Alex Jones

Postby Jimbo » 09 Aug 2018, 18:25

The Modernist wrote: It's complicated isn't it? I'm not defending him at all, but you have to get to the specifics - are the particular comments defamatory, would they incite racial hatred etc.


Have you ever watched him? His antisemitism is geared to stir up the haters. He goes through all the names, all Jewish, the Rothschilds, Soros, etc., and then starts screaming and sputtering like he's possessed like the Jews are Satan. It's shocking to me but might be fun to whoever suspects the Jews of running the world - and what AJ fan doesn't?

But as noted he's been at this for years. Why is he banned all of a sudden? That's where we need to get some specifics.

I notice a difference between Apple owned Safari and Firefox. On my computer Safari blocks a number of political sites which are allowed on Firefox.
Gadfly

User avatar
Snarfyguy
Dominated by the Obscure
Posts: 52740
Joined: 21 Jul 2003, 19:04
Location: New York

Re: Internet Platform Removals, i.e. Alex Jones

Postby Snarfyguy » 09 Aug 2018, 21:02

Jimbo wrote:Why is he banned all of a sudden? That's where we need to get some specifics.

Wasn't it just last week that he appeared to be suggesting that Robert Mueller should be shot, while somehow keeping it just this side of incitement?

"It's going to happen, we're going to walk out in the square, politically, at high noon, and he's going to find out whether he makes a move, man make the move first, and then it's going to happen," Jones said as he pantomimed shooting at Mueller.

"It's not a joke. It's not a game. It's the real world. Politically. You're going to get it, or I'm going to die trying, bitch. Get ready. We're going to bang heads," Jones continued, pretending to fire a gun at Mueller.


I think it's not so much that I "don't like" him, but that this sort of thing clearly crosses a line. Private companies that own social media apps are of course free to arrive at the same conclusion. They all have terms of service and this kind of speech pretty clearly has no place on their platforms (unless they just don't give a f*ck and just want the money).
Jimbo wrote:Look, all I know is pretty much what I get from Robert Parry over at Consortium News.