6 ms·

I don't know why but what's happening to Parler doesn't feel right at all...

Cthulhu_ 6y ago
While it does feel reactionary (if that's the right word) that the services are only now revoking doing business with Parler, they are within their rights to stop the contract one-sidedly. I'm actually fairly sure that in the contract they don't even have to state a reason, but don't quote me on that. Something something free market.
- saargrin 6y ago
  that would be cool if they also implemented the same policy towards other violent/inciteful players and terror organizations
  - Renaud 6y ago
    They should, and many do. Once you start peddling in calls to violence against people, no just ideas, then you should lose access to your platform and well deserve to be investigated. Being complacent with these things gets people killed. You can have free speech all you want but are also responsible for what you say. Free speech doesn't mean you get a free pass without consequences.
    - saargrin 6y ago
      except their efforts are largely focused and selective switch to arabic language and you will see things that could be easily identified as violent propaganda,yet they stay up because FB censorship system is not interested in enforcing rules in that sector from what i hear its pretty much the same for India
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- traveler01 6y ago
  > While it does feel reactionary (if that's the right word) that the services are only now revoking doing business with Parler, they are within their rights to stop the contract one-sidedly. I'm actually fairly sure that in the contract they don't even have to state a reason, but don't quote me on that. Yeah most of these services are doing that to avoid being associated with Parler and these Trump movements. But it has an anti-democratic feel to it.
  - nkoren 6y ago
    Yep, there are no good choices here. Parler is an organizing venue for Trump supporters attempting to overturn a democratic election and/or storm the capitol, which also has a rather anti-democratic feel to it, no? So you can think of it as a trolley problem with "democracy" strapped to both sets of tracks. Since democracy will be a casualty, to one extent or another, in both the "do nothing" and "do something" options, the service providers must ask themselves: which scenario will hurt democracy worse?
    - SideburnsOfDoom 6y ago
      > the service providers must ask themselves: which scenario will hurt democracy worse? As I mentioned above, what they are likely asking themselves is pragmatic instead of moral, i.e. "which option exposes us as a company to the most legal problems? What hurts profits?" That explains why service providers changed their thinking so suddenly and dramatically after, you know, a whole lot of serious crimes against the state happened on the 6th, and the evidence trail runs through those service providers.
    - SideburnsOfDoom 6y ago
      > the service providers must ask themselves: which scenario will hurt democracy worse Adendum: why _must_ they ask themselves that? Do you think Facebook ever has acted in that way? Do you think that Fox News does? It would be nice, but recognise that none of these are entities dedicated to maximising democracy. They have been behaving otherwise for decades. They won't spontaneously change of their own accord. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/06/technology/myanmar-facebook.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/06/technology/myanmar-facebo...
Aeolun 6y ago
I agree. As much as I feel it should be taken down, this has all the makings of a (corporate) lynch mob.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- rndholesqpeg 6y ago
  I guess you dont get the irony of using 'Lynch Mob' figuratively, because Parler was de-platformed for helping organize literal Lynch Mobs
  - Aeolun 6y ago
    No, I was aware of that. It was why I used the term. It’s not the same at all, but it still leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Legal action against the platform would have been fine.
    - Balgair 6y ago
      No judge would take the case though. Not from an ideological stand, but from a technical one. Amazon (presumably) has a contract that says they can nullify the contract if you do things that violate certain conditions. Say it was Amazon suing Parler here. Amazon says that Parler is doing stuff Amazon doesn't like. Parler says tough cookies, we're still gonna do that stuff. So Amazon brings Parler to court. The Judge asks what Amazon wants to do about this. Amazon says it wants to kick Parler off. The Judge says 'Yes, the contract between you two says you can do that. Why the hell are you wasting my time? Read your own contract, what are you, a buncha pre-laws?' Parler is then kicked off. Bad taste or not, Amazon (it appears) is well within it's rights to dissolve the contract with Parler (which I have not seen).
      - zerker2000 6y ago
        I believe GP is referring to government legal action against Parler for "helping" organize lynch mobs. Extralegal retribution from oligopolistic service providers is of course also allowed by law, that just doesn't make it fine.
AniseAbyss 6y ago
Tech companies are shutting the Trump movement down because of public pressure. Its no different from any other boycott in that sense. Capitol Hill riot was the classic "free speech but not free from consequences" moment. Association with conservatives is now a financial liability.
- cbozeman 6y ago
  > Association with conservatives is now a financial liability. Considering they make up an enormous percentage of the population, I'm not sure that's a sound strategic move.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - andromeduck 6y ago
    The left loves to defund/demonitize firearms content, the right nudity and lgbt content and both love deplatforming their opponents one moment and then get outraged if their stuff is removed the next. You see it with net neutrality, cda230, demonitization, forum moderation etc. It seems people just don't care about consistency anymore, it's just whatever is convenient in the moment.
    - swebs 6y ago
      You're talking about authoritarians on both sides. There are still libertarians on both sides (and even independent) who care more about civil liberties like freedom of speech (the ideal, not just the first amendment).
      - arminiusreturns 6y ago
        This! It frustrates me so much that so many people constantly just talk about left and right while completely ignoring the Y-axis of the political spectrum! To me, both parties are firmly in authoritarian land, and no amount of calling it "both sides-ism" will change that fact. Another frustrating thing is seeing people take a position and just label everything one or the other side, while there are a huge swath of voters and non-voters who don't identify with either party. (sidenote: Right now, I am liking the Movement for a Peoples Party.)
SideburnsOfDoom 6y ago
I think that's what's happening is that the big tech cos have had conversations with their lawyers along the lines of "it's one thing to host talk of insurrection from Bob in Knoxville when it looks like cosplay fantasising, but it's another to host it after they killed an on duty police officer while storming the Capitol building with intent to kill senators". The provider's potential liability in planning high crimes will tend to focus minds in a way way that "hosting deplorable speech" did not. I'm not suggesting that the deplorable speech was mere harmless fantasising, as it seldom is, on a long-enough timeline. Just that this justification is manifestly no longer tenable.
- AniseAbyss 6y ago
  This reminds me of the fascist movement in 1930s Britain. They became socially unacceptable when they started to use violence.
jdub 6y ago
Parler was set up by spivs and cranks to encourage fools and fascists to gather and destroy civil society. Now that same civil society has rejected them. Don't feel too bad.
wtfiswiththis 6y ago
Parler is a single issue site funded by the Mercer family, the same family that funded Cambridge Analytica who helped Trump rise to presidency. It's sole purpose is to be a staging area for right wing extremists and politicians who support things like violent coup attempts in D.C. I didn't cry about Amaq being removed every time it popped up and I won't be crying about this. If you feel so strongly about it look up the reasons why Amazon and others dropped them. Look at the posts the Parler mods refused to remove.

While it does feel reactionary (if that's the right word) that the services are only now revoking doing business with Parler, they are within their rights to stop the contract one-sidedly. I'm actually fairly sure that in the contract they don't even have to state a reason, but don't quote me on that. Something something free market.

saargrin 6y ago
that would be cool if they also implemented the same policy towards other violent/inciteful players and terror organizations
- Renaud 6y ago
  They should, and many do. Once you start peddling in calls to violence against people, no just ideas, then you should lose access to your platform and well deserve to be investigated. Being complacent with these things gets people killed. You can have free speech all you want but are also responsible for what you say. Free speech doesn't mean you get a free pass without consequences.
  - saargrin 6y ago
    except their efforts are largely focused and selective switch to arabic language and you will see things that could be easily identified as violent propaganda,yet they stay up because FB censorship system is not interested in enforcing rules in that sector from what i hear its pretty much the same for India
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
traveler01 6y ago
> While it does feel reactionary (if that's the right word) that the services are only now revoking doing business with Parler, they are within their rights to stop the contract one-sidedly. I'm actually fairly sure that in the contract they don't even have to state a reason, but don't quote me on that. Yeah most of these services are doing that to avoid being associated with Parler and these Trump movements. But it has an anti-democratic feel to it.
- nkoren 6y ago
  Yep, there are no good choices here. Parler is an organizing venue for Trump supporters attempting to overturn a democratic election and/or storm the capitol, which also has a rather anti-democratic feel to it, no? So you can think of it as a trolley problem with "democracy" strapped to both sets of tracks. Since democracy will be a casualty, to one extent or another, in both the "do nothing" and "do something" options, the service providers must ask themselves: which scenario will hurt democracy worse?
  - SideburnsOfDoom 6y ago
    > the service providers must ask themselves: which scenario will hurt democracy worse? As I mentioned above, what they are likely asking themselves is pragmatic instead of moral, i.e. "which option exposes us as a company to the most legal problems? What hurts profits?" That explains why service providers changed their thinking so suddenly and dramatically after, you know, a whole lot of serious crimes against the state happened on the 6th, and the evidence trail runs through those service providers.
  - SideburnsOfDoom 6y ago
    > the service providers must ask themselves: which scenario will hurt democracy worse Adendum: why _must_ they ask themselves that? Do you think Facebook ever has acted in that way? Do you think that Fox News does? It would be nice, but recognise that none of these are entities dedicated to maximising democracy. They have been behaving otherwise for decades. They won't spontaneously change of their own accord. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/06/technology/myanmar-facebook.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/06/technology/myanmar-facebo...

Aeolun 6y ago

I agree. As much as I feel it should be taken down, this has all the makings of a (corporate) lynch mob.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
rndholesqpeg 6y ago
I guess you dont get the irony of using 'Lynch Mob' figuratively, because Parler was de-platformed for helping organize literal Lynch Mobs
- Aeolun 6y ago
  No, I was aware of that. It was why I used the term. It’s not the same at all, but it still leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Legal action against the platform would have been fine.
  - Balgair 6y ago
    No judge would take the case though. Not from an ideological stand, but from a technical one. Amazon (presumably) has a contract that says they can nullify the contract if you do things that violate certain conditions. Say it was Amazon suing Parler here. Amazon says that Parler is doing stuff Amazon doesn't like. Parler says tough cookies, we're still gonna do that stuff. So Amazon brings Parler to court. The Judge asks what Amazon wants to do about this. Amazon says it wants to kick Parler off. The Judge says 'Yes, the contract between you two says you can do that. Why the hell are you wasting my time? Read your own contract, what are you, a buncha pre-laws?' Parler is then kicked off. Bad taste or not, Amazon (it appears) is well within it's rights to dissolve the contract with Parler (which I have not seen).
    - zerker2000 6y ago
      I believe GP is referring to government legal action against Parler for "helping" organize lynch mobs. Extralegal retribution from oligopolistic service providers is of course also allowed by law, that just doesn't make it fine.

AniseAbyss 6y ago

Tech companies are shutting the Trump movement down because of public pressure. Its no different from any other boycott in that sense. Capitol Hill riot was the classic "free speech but not free from consequences" moment. Association with conservatives is now a financial liability.

cbozeman 6y ago
> Association with conservatives is now a financial liability. Considering they make up an enormous percentage of the population, I'm not sure that's a sound strategic move.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- andromeduck 6y ago
  The left loves to defund/demonitize firearms content, the right nudity and lgbt content and both love deplatforming their opponents one moment and then get outraged if their stuff is removed the next. You see it with net neutrality, cda230, demonitization, forum moderation etc. It seems people just don't care about consistency anymore, it's just whatever is convenient in the moment.
  - swebs 6y ago
    You're talking about authoritarians on both sides. There are still libertarians on both sides (and even independent) who care more about civil liberties like freedom of speech (the ideal, not just the first amendment).
    - arminiusreturns 6y ago
      This! It frustrates me so much that so many people constantly just talk about left and right while completely ignoring the Y-axis of the political spectrum! To me, both parties are firmly in authoritarian land, and no amount of calling it "both sides-ism" will change that fact. Another frustrating thing is seeing people take a position and just label everything one or the other side, while there are a huge swath of voters and non-voters who don't identify with either party. (sidenote: Right now, I am liking the Movement for a Peoples Party.)

SideburnsOfDoom 6y ago

I think that's what's happening is that the big tech cos have had conversations with their lawyers along the lines of "it's one thing to host talk of insurrection from Bob in Knoxville when it looks like cosplay fantasising, but it's another to host it after they killed an on duty police officer while storming the Capitol building with intent to kill senators". The provider's potential liability in planning high crimes will tend to focus minds in a way way that "hosting deplorable speech" did not. I'm not suggesting that the deplorable speech was mere harmless fantasising, as it seldom is, on a long-enough timeline. Just that this justification is manifestly no longer tenable.

AniseAbyss 6y ago
This reminds me of the fascist movement in 1930s Britain. They became socially unacceptable when they started to use violence.

jdub 6y ago

Parler was set up by spivs and cranks to encourage fools and fascists to gather and destroy civil society. Now that same civil society has rejected them. Don't feel too bad.

wtfiswiththis 6y ago

Parler is a single issue site funded by the Mercer family, the same family that funded Cambridge Analytica who helped Trump rise to presidency. It's sole purpose is to be a staging area for right wing extremists and politicians who support things like violent coup attempts in D.C. I didn't cry about Amaq being removed every time it popped up and I won't be crying about this. If you feel so strongly about it look up the reasons why Amazon and others dropped them. Look at the posts the Parler mods refused to remove.