4 ms·

I’m glad that you acknowledge that the move is obviously politically motivated. I don’t think that dissenting voices should be silenced. The free marketplace of

by zaroth 6y ago

I’m glad that you acknowledge that the move is obviously politically motivated. I don’t think that dissenting voices should be silenced. The free marketplace of ideas used to be an American ideal. Now it’s a fireable offense, or in the case of businesses, a capital one. Google had a monopoly on internet advertising. They should have no such right to decide who uses their Ad platform based on political affiliation or leanings. There’s plenty enough blame to spread around both left and right for fake news. See just most recently Fox doctoring photos of CHAZ versus many MSM sites falsely misrepresenting a conciliatory Trump quote on Floyd and the recent protests. If ZH is committing libel they should be sued for it and held liable. Taking away their basically sole source of income and blaming it on their comment section is flimsy doublespeak in my opinion. There is a similar effort within Google to try to demonetize Breitbart and other right-wing sites. A higher claim to the truth is no justification at all for silencing dissent. IMO this is just another step in a growing and dangerous trend of politicized de-platforming which I find extremely worrisome.

gpu_explorer 6y ago
Racism is antisocial behavior. Racism is not dissent.
- zaroth 6y ago
  Who said anything about racism? But even still, we see cases [1] where questioning any aspect of the BLM movement is falsely equated with racism. [1] - https://www.vnews.com/Windsor-High-School-Story-34741525 https://www.vnews.com/Windsor-High-School-Story-34741525
RhodesianHunter 6y ago
>The free marketplace of ideas used to be an American ideal. At what point in American history could you expect to use someone else's platform, regardless of your content, in the name of free speech? That's right, never. Freedom of speech is about government censorship and nothing else.
- collyw 6y ago
  Telephone lines.
  - undersuit 6y ago
    Telephone line owners were forced into being a public utility in the US.
- the_omegist 6y ago
  If a train company back in 1850 had a near monopoly in the whole country or a whole state and decided who could or not use their "platform" based on what they say, would it be alright? They sale ads. If no advertiser wants to put an ad on a website, fine. But they can't decide to not offer their service.

by zaroth 6y ago

gpu_explorer 6y ago

Racism is antisocial behavior. Racism is not dissent.

zaroth 6y ago
Who said anything about racism? But even still, we see cases [1] where questioning any aspect of the BLM movement is falsely equated with racism. [1] - https://www.vnews.com/Windsor-High-School-Story-34741525 https://www.vnews.com/Windsor-High-School-Story-34741525

RhodesianHunter 6y ago

>The free marketplace of ideas used to be an American ideal. At what point in American history could you expect to use someone else's platform, regardless of your content, in the name of free speech? That's right, never. Freedom of speech is about government censorship and nothing else.

collyw 6y ago
Telephone lines.
- undersuit 6y ago
  Telephone line owners were forced into being a public utility in the US.
the_omegist 6y ago
If a train company back in 1850 had a near monopoly in the whole country or a whole state and decided who could or not use their "platform" based on what they say, would it be alright? They sale ads. If no advertiser wants to put an ad on a website, fine. But they can't decide to not offer their service.