You are probably right, the internet is inherently a flawed method of communication, but so long as it remains peoples main source of communication, we should be worried about the fact that a half a dozen people are calling the shots on what opinions are valid, vs what opinions arent.... Its pretty obvious that people like Steven Crowder or LEGITIMATE history professors, are not the people who should be silenced.
I agree with the thought..... that they are scared and feel the need to self regulate, but they are very clearly taking a side here, and pissing off half the country.... They arent self regulating, they are very specifically choosing a side.
Yeah they are absolutely taking a side, they are run by leftists, and they know it will be leftists in government regulating them. There are people who are keeping score of who is being banned, and for these platforms, the majority of people banned better be conservative. Thats why Facebook got in trouble in the first place. It was perceived that Cambridge Analytica obtained user data and it was used to benefit Trump. The left was up in arms. Facebook took some serious hits for that. In 2012, Obama used Facebook user data to benefit his campaign and the left actually bragged about it. They said Obama was a mastermind because of it.
I am tired of being told "they are private companies" as if that ends the discussion. There are valid questions as to whether they are abusing monopoly power and also if they have violated provisions of internet law that grants them immunity from lawsuits on the ground that they are not exercising editorial control. Even if their actions are technically legal, Trump is making a huge mistake in not imposing regulation on them. He has ample means to do so without congress. For example, the FCC or FTC could impose a mandate to serve users fairly and without bias. Banks, insurance companies and mortgage companies are private too and they face all kinds of regulation as to what they can do in rejecting business. Trump's election owed a lot to independent internet commentators and meme creators. The big tech and social media monopolists have clearly vowed not to allow something like that to happen again. The establishment republicans have already surrendered but most of them are not unhappy about getting right wing voices banned. Now that more mainstream people are getting banned, suddenly they are whining about it, but they are so conflicted and bought off, they will do nothing. It's up to Trump and, as usual, he is all talk and no action.
ESV is an obious opportunitiy over 8.16, tight stop below 7.99, but tomorrow is bounce day in oil.... IMO. Would love to See what Atticus thinks of this.
How does a political entity mandate rules on non-bias? It just cannot happen. Media always has tended to be liberal but Conservatives have numerous voice outlets with as much power and as much propaganda as the CNNs and MSNBCs. I think the bigger problem is not so much which message is getting out louder and stronger, but how stupid we are as a population who believe internet phrases as facts and argue them ad nauseum with no foundation. Politics is opinion and there are usually very little facts. We have been dumbed down to believe opinions are facts and no one challenges it.
"I think the bigger problem is not so much which message is getting out louder and stronger, but how stupid we are as a population who believe internet phrases as facts and argue them ad nauseum with no foundation. Politics is opinion and there are usually very little facts. We have been dumbed down to believe opinions are facts and no one challenges it." Example: Elizabeth Warren’s Plan to Bamboozle American Voters https://economicprism.com/elizabeth-warrens-plan-to-bamboozle-american-voters/
Both parties are loathsome for the most part. Dems are corrupt hacks who will do or say anything for power. Reps are lying sack of shit tools of the Koch Brothers and defense contractors. Like Tucker said the other night, why can't we have a party that is populist on economics and traditional in social matters? And non-interventionist in foreign affairs. Wouldn't that appeal to a lot of people?
It would be they need money to get elected so they have to whore themselves, and also the U.S. is no longer so easy to identify the majority as populist, traditional, etc... Good luck getting a majority to agree on what traditional is. Within each party you have far over, moderate and centerist. The plurality of ideas, backgrounds and beliefs means no party could ever really represent anything more than itself as George Washington predicted.