• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Social Media Executive Order

RadioPatrol said:
I remember Gab's leaders made a statement that claims they are for freedom and free speech. But back in August when the Alex Jones Boycotts were happening I thought at some point that Gab's leaders will become a target of a boycott threat just like facebook and twitter though.
Click to expand...

Yesterday Gab was freely co-operating with the FBI and giving up personal data on the shooter, which some might consider inappropriate. Not in this case, because no one wants to condone what this guy ultimately did. My point is he was posting this stuff for a long time, and wasn't banned, which says to me that the whole furor about social media being biased against conservatives is a load of hooey. All it did was embolden these extremists who then took it to the next level.

My prediction is that at some point we'll see a black market social media platform based in Iran or China that will allow anything with no regulatory threats from the US government. It'll be up to ISPs to decide if they will let those sites through their network. Once again we'll hear about big tech silencing conservatives. The more they bash and attack these companies, with Congress & the president pressuring them with hearings and regulation, the less the companies will do to control extremists. If they're not getting support from the government, and it's just attracting bad publicity, why should they bother?
 
https://www.king5.com/article/news/...pect/465-0235582e-9bc2-4424-8518-90a5cfb37b62

Now Gab is getting bigger attention due to the Shooting in Pennsylvania.

Here's what you need to know about Gab:
How did it start?

Gab was launched in 2016 as an alternative to traditional platforms such as Twitter and Facebook. During that time, Twitter had suspended several accounts associated with the "alt-right" movement on the same day it vowed a crackdown on hate speech.

The suspensions pushed many people to Gab, which has fewer restrictions on what content users can post compared with Twitter and other social media.

"Gab’s mission is to put people and free speech first," the service's guidelines say. "We believe that the only valid form of censorship is an individual’s own choice to opt-out."

The relaxed rules opened the door for content such as anti-Semitic posts and conspiracy theories. In August, according to The Verge, Microsoft threatened to stop hosting the social network over a pair of anti-Semitic posts, which eventually were removed.

Gab's rules say it prohibits activities such as posting illegal pornography, engaging in any illegal activity using Gab, or "calling for the acts of violence against others, promoting or engaging in self-harm, and/or acts of cruelty, threatening language or behavior that clearly, directly and incontrovertibly infringes on the safety of another user or individual(s)."
Click to expand...
 
With the whole "big evil liberal companies are throttling/banning/censoring conservatives complaints, it's virtually impossible to prove when each individual has posts or search results tailored to them. Unless people really think conservative political content should be force fed to people who don't want it (some may), you'll never be able to "prove" it and it will always be a talking point. Same with search results.
 
gr8oldies said:
you'll never be able to "prove" it and it will always be a talking point. Same with search results.
Click to expand...

Still, there's no requirement that any of these companies has to be fair or unbiased, just as there's no rule that AM talk radio has to be fair and unbiased.
 
Antitrust activity is difficult to prove, but when it is blatant it can be dealt with. That was the essence of the draft that was circulated.
 
There are other social networks, people just haven't chosen to use them and some of them have folded. I don't see how anti-trust action forced Breitbart into liberal Facebook newsfeeds, however
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.
Back
Top Bottom