6 ms·

Exactly. And look at the uproar that the bakery caused with the constant mainstream news coverage back then. But now? Silence, and if not silence, total justifi

by aviv 8y ago

Exactly. And look at the uproar that the bakery caused with the constant mainstream news coverage back then. But now? Silence, and if not silence, total justification and questioning why Big Tech didn't do it sooner.

scarface74 8y ago
When did the mainstream right start openly embracing racist as thier people outside of the South? I could never see any former Republican President or leadership in the modern era support someone like Alex Jones. Alex Jones podcast was not "banned" from Apple's platform. Apple never hosted either the media or the RSS metadata. Anyone who wants to listen to the podcast can go on Google do a search find the feed subscription and add to the podcast app. Edit: Changed "was banned" to "wasn't banned".
- aviv 8y ago
  That's not my point. I don't like or listen to the guy, but your reaction shows precisely why they chose him. Who is next? If they can take down someone as vocal as Alex Jones, they can take down anyone.
  - darpa_escapee 8y ago
    Let this be a lesson to us all. If you blatantly violate terms of service, there's no amount of harassing families of school shooting victims that will get your platform back.
    - threatofrain 8y ago
      Banning people like Alex Jones won't unharass those parents either. People around the country still think that those parents lied about the death of their children in order to score financial or political gain. And what exactly is Alex Jones' brand of conservatism? Does it involve a narrative of white extinction and false black victimhood? Climate change as a conspiracy? Obama is a Muslim who isn't even a US citizen? What makes Alex Jones conservative?
      - darpa_escapee 8y ago
        You should ask someone who bemoans his removal as censorship against conservatives. > People around the country still think that those parents lied about the death of their children in order to score financial or political gain. Who made money originally selling them this lie and then perpetuating it?
      - scarface74 8y ago
        No it won't "unharass people" just like it won't stop people from seeing porn just because Apple doesn't sell "Debbie Does Dallas". Every private company has a brand that it wants to project.
  - scarface74 8y ago
    Conservatives are always embracing the free market. If there were a market for his ideas, he should have no trouble finding funding, advertising, etc. If his ideas really are that popular, he should be able to create the conservative versions of Twitter, Facebook, etc. All of the FAANG companies started out competing against entrenched incumbents by offering a service they didn't. Why can't he do the same?
    - sheepmullet 8y ago
      > If there were a market for his ideas, he should have no trouble finding funding, advertising, etc. Alex Jones will be fine. It’s the up and comers who are clearly being locked out of the market.
      - scarface74 8y ago
        You mean like a certain reality star that had no funding, was outspent by his rivals in the primary, who the conservative establishment fought against the entire time and still ended up becoming President? If your ideas are popular enough and you know how to market yourself, you don't have to be a sharecropper on FAANG's farm.
threatofrain 8y ago
Exactly? Scarface is saying that the refusal to promote a message is also part of free speech, and an easier case than the refusal to serve gay customers. At best your response is to ask those who have sympathy towards gay people, "Why don't you get angry at laws which suggest that businesses have to serve gay people, even if their religious beliefs tell them that homosexuality is a sin?" I also wouldn't be surprised if the thinking behind so many Fortune 500 companies is at least due to a calculation of brand posture going into the future. A lot of the companies being discussed at the moment are social media companies, and youth are the ones who can drive a MySpace event. I also must ask for elaboration as to the Alex Jones brand of conservatism -- does it involve a narrative of white extinction and undeserving blacks? False flag stories about the Sandy Hook shooting? Does he represent American conservatism?
- Dagwoodie 8y ago
  The baker comparison doesn't work. You don't see one guy or even three companies in Colorado controlling 99% of the messages going on cakes, globally, like you do with social media speech on Google/Facebook/Twitter platforms in California. Whether you like it or not, they are monopolies who are coordinating attacks on conservatives by stifling speech that is by and large perfectly legal in the US. Very concerning.
  - scarface74 8y ago
    If you are completely dependent on exposure through Google, Facebook, and Twitter, you're doing it wrong. I read about plenty of bloggers who lost half thier traffic the day Google Reader shut down for instance. Wasn't their a clickbait company that went out of business due to an algorithm change on Google? Even if you aren't controversial, you are just one of millions of people trying to get your ideas out. You're going to languish in obscurity unless you have an alternate means of promoting yourself. No one "stifled" Alex Jones' speech. His podcast is still being published on his own site like it always was and you can still add it to your podcast app of choice.
- aviv 8y ago
  He represents free speech. He is just one of several conservative leaning voices silenced by Big Tech in recent months. One of the most troubling aspects of the Alex Jones ban is the obvious coordination among Apple, Facebook, YouTube and others to completely take him off their platforms at the exact same time. How this doesn't bother HN is crazy. It's truly crazy how YouTube takes down Alex Jones easily but ElsaGate pedo like predatory channels are still thriving on their platform, with millions of views and comment threads full of cryptic information exchange of the worst kind one can imagine. And it's still up. Insanity prevails.

by aviv 8y ago

scarface74 8y ago

When did the mainstream right start openly embracing racist as thier people outside of the South? I could never see any former Republican President or leadership in the modern era support someone like Alex Jones. Alex Jones podcast was not "banned" from Apple's platform. Apple never hosted either the media or the RSS metadata. Anyone who wants to listen to the podcast can go on Google do a search find the feed subscription and add to the podcast app. Edit: Changed "was banned" to "wasn't banned".

aviv 8y ago
That's not my point. I don't like or listen to the guy, but your reaction shows precisely why they chose him. Who is next? If they can take down someone as vocal as Alex Jones, they can take down anyone.
- darpa_escapee 8y ago
  Let this be a lesson to us all. If you blatantly violate terms of service, there's no amount of harassing families of school shooting victims that will get your platform back.
  - threatofrain 8y ago
    Banning people like Alex Jones won't unharass those parents either. People around the country still think that those parents lied about the death of their children in order to score financial or political gain. And what exactly is Alex Jones' brand of conservatism? Does it involve a narrative of white extinction and false black victimhood? Climate change as a conspiracy? Obama is a Muslim who isn't even a US citizen? What makes Alex Jones conservative?
    - darpa_escapee 8y ago
      You should ask someone who bemoans his removal as censorship against conservatives. > People around the country still think that those parents lied about the death of their children in order to score financial or political gain. Who made money originally selling them this lie and then perpetuating it?
    - scarface74 8y ago
      No it won't "unharass people" just like it won't stop people from seeing porn just because Apple doesn't sell "Debbie Does Dallas". Every private company has a brand that it wants to project.
- scarface74 8y ago
  Conservatives are always embracing the free market. If there were a market for his ideas, he should have no trouble finding funding, advertising, etc. If his ideas really are that popular, he should be able to create the conservative versions of Twitter, Facebook, etc. All of the FAANG companies started out competing against entrenched incumbents by offering a service they didn't. Why can't he do the same?
  - sheepmullet 8y ago
    > If there were a market for his ideas, he should have no trouble finding funding, advertising, etc. Alex Jones will be fine. It’s the up and comers who are clearly being locked out of the market.
    - scarface74 8y ago
      You mean like a certain reality star that had no funding, was outspent by his rivals in the primary, who the conservative establishment fought against the entire time and still ended up becoming President? If your ideas are popular enough and you know how to market yourself, you don't have to be a sharecropper on FAANG's farm.

threatofrain 8y ago

Exactly? Scarface is saying that the refusal to promote a message is also part of free speech, and an easier case than the refusal to serve gay customers. At best your response is to ask those who have sympathy towards gay people, "Why don't you get angry at laws which suggest that businesses have to serve gay people, even if their religious beliefs tell them that homosexuality is a sin?" I also wouldn't be surprised if the thinking behind so many Fortune 500 companies is at least due to a calculation of brand posture going into the future. A lot of the companies being discussed at the moment are social media companies, and youth are the ones who can drive a MySpace event. I also must ask for elaboration as to the Alex Jones brand of conservatism -- does it involve a narrative of white extinction and undeserving blacks? False flag stories about the Sandy Hook shooting? Does he represent American conservatism?

Dagwoodie 8y ago
The baker comparison doesn't work. You don't see one guy or even three companies in Colorado controlling 99% of the messages going on cakes, globally, like you do with social media speech on Google/Facebook/Twitter platforms in California. Whether you like it or not, they are monopolies who are coordinating attacks on conservatives by stifling speech that is by and large perfectly legal in the US. Very concerning.
- scarface74 8y ago
  If you are completely dependent on exposure through Google, Facebook, and Twitter, you're doing it wrong. I read about plenty of bloggers who lost half thier traffic the day Google Reader shut down for instance. Wasn't their a clickbait company that went out of business due to an algorithm change on Google? Even if you aren't controversial, you are just one of millions of people trying to get your ideas out. You're going to languish in obscurity unless you have an alternate means of promoting yourself. No one "stifled" Alex Jones' speech. His podcast is still being published on his own site like it always was and you can still add it to your podcast app of choice.
aviv 8y ago
He represents free speech. He is just one of several conservative leaning voices silenced by Big Tech in recent months. One of the most troubling aspects of the Alex Jones ban is the obvious coordination among Apple, Facebook, YouTube and others to completely take him off their platforms at the exact same time. How this doesn't bother HN is crazy. It's truly crazy how YouTube takes down Alex Jones easily but ElsaGate pedo like predatory channels are still thriving on their platform, with millions of views and comment threads full of cryptic information exchange of the worst kind one can imagine. And it's still up. Insanity prevails.