7 ms·

A lot of people in this thread are casting political attacks on Facebook as a Democratic thing, so I'll just point out that conservative Republican Senator Josh

by djur 5y ago

A lot of people in this thread are casting political attacks on Facebook as a Democratic thing, so I'll just point out that conservative Republican Senator Josh Hawley has been attacking Facebook for years, including proposals to strip them of Section 230 protection and to allow people to sue them in federal court for "harmful content". https://www.hawley.senate.gov/hawley-demands-answers-facebook-over-censorship-hunter-biden-article https://www.hawley.senate.gov/hawley-demands-answers-faceboo... https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/6950261/Limiting-Section-230-Immunity-to-Good-Samaritans.pdf https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/6950261/Limiting-Sect... https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/21074054/federal-big-tech-tort-act-text.pdf https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/21074054/federal-big-...

hunterb123 5y ago
Your very first link is Hawley sending a letter because Facebook censored a Hunter Ukraine story. Republicans are pissed because of the censorship (the big ones being lab leak and Hunter Biden's laptop, but there are smaller things all the time, 15 days bans for sharing a story the narrative doesn't agree with). There's a good argument to make if FB wants to act like the arbiter of truth, the "truth" they choose should be legally liable. Democrats are pissed because FB doesn't go far enough or something. They want ALL conservative media off the site. Democrats want to amplify that censorship, Republicans don't want any censorship. Who is on the right side?
- Loughla 5y ago
  You're painting with too broad of a brush here, I think. In general, saying 'all' about anything tends to make that statement false at some point. It's easy to knock down a straw-man, I guess is my point.
  - hunterb123 5y ago
    My point is it's clearly a party issue to censor conservatives in the D party. The only issue R's have with FB is the censorship itself. Does that clear things up or do you have any questions?
    - shadowgovt 5y ago
      I've seen enough pro-Marxists posts brigaded off of Facebook to know that Republicans have no actual problem with Facebook censorship. Their beef is what Facebook is allowed to censor. They don't want to stop the juggernaut; they want to steer it.
      - hunterb123 5y ago
        And which Republican representatives are those? Or are you talking about random people? I can find you random people of all calibers on both sides, that's not the conversation. This is about politicians in the government coordinating a way to censor citizens who practice political dissent.
jwond 5y ago
The difference from what I see is that Republicans are attacking Facebook for censoring too much, while Democrats are attacking Facebook for censoring too little.
- mbg721 5y ago
  Only because of the nature of the censored content; Republicans aren't inherently as anti-censorship as the libertarian wing would like to hope they are. Social media are the fourth-and-a-half estate, and they're flexing their muscles for the other party.
  - hunterb123 5y ago
    I haven't seen any calls from any Republicans to censor any speech. Their base is very adamant about the Bill of Rights. Do you have any examples to back up your statement? Keep in mind we're talking about silencing political dissent, that's pretty fucking major, not a "oh both sides do it, that's life" thing.
    - mbg721 5y ago
      I'm thinking more of the Satanism scares of the 80s. Republicans have never really had the mass-media on their side post-Watergate (except maybe briefly after 9/11), so they can't silence anyone in the "fortifying the election" sense.
    - AlexandrB 5y ago
      Marco Rubio just proposed a bill to stop corporations from being too "woke"[1]. There are also numerous instances of Republican politicians complaining or proposing bills about things like athletes kneeling during the anthem, burning of the flag, or other forms of expressions they deem "un-American". That's not even mentioning the Republican obsession with controlling "obscenity" on TV and other public media. [1] https://www.rubio.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2021/9/new-rubio-bill-helps-shareholders-fight-back-against-woke-corporations https://www.rubio.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2021/9/new-rub...

by djur 5y ago

hunterb123 5y ago

Your very first link is Hawley sending a letter because Facebook censored a Hunter Ukraine story. Republicans are pissed because of the censorship (the big ones being lab leak and Hunter Biden's laptop, but there are smaller things all the time, 15 days bans for sharing a story the narrative doesn't agree with). There's a good argument to make if FB wants to act like the arbiter of truth, the "truth" they choose should be legally liable. Democrats are pissed because FB doesn't go far enough or something. They want ALL conservative media off the site. Democrats want to amplify that censorship, Republicans don't want any censorship. Who is on the right side?

Loughla 5y ago
You're painting with too broad of a brush here, I think. In general, saying 'all' about anything tends to make that statement false at some point. It's easy to knock down a straw-man, I guess is my point.
- hunterb123 5y ago
  My point is it's clearly a party issue to censor conservatives in the D party. The only issue R's have with FB is the censorship itself. Does that clear things up or do you have any questions?
  - shadowgovt 5y ago
    I've seen enough pro-Marxists posts brigaded off of Facebook to know that Republicans have no actual problem with Facebook censorship. Their beef is what Facebook is allowed to censor. They don't want to stop the juggernaut; they want to steer it.
    - hunterb123 5y ago
      And which Republican representatives are those? Or are you talking about random people? I can find you random people of all calibers on both sides, that's not the conversation. This is about politicians in the government coordinating a way to censor citizens who practice political dissent.

jwond 5y ago

The difference from what I see is that Republicans are attacking Facebook for censoring too much, while Democrats are attacking Facebook for censoring too little.

mbg721 5y ago
Only because of the nature of the censored content; Republicans aren't inherently as anti-censorship as the libertarian wing would like to hope they are. Social media are the fourth-and-a-half estate, and they're flexing their muscles for the other party.
- hunterb123 5y ago
  I haven't seen any calls from any Republicans to censor any speech. Their base is very adamant about the Bill of Rights. Do you have any examples to back up your statement? Keep in mind we're talking about silencing political dissent, that's pretty fucking major, not a "oh both sides do it, that's life" thing.
  - mbg721 5y ago
    I'm thinking more of the Satanism scares of the 80s. Republicans have never really had the mass-media on their side post-Watergate (except maybe briefly after 9/11), so they can't silence anyone in the "fortifying the election" sense.
  - AlexandrB 5y ago
    Marco Rubio just proposed a bill to stop corporations from being too "woke"[1]. There are also numerous instances of Republican politicians complaining or proposing bills about things like athletes kneeling during the anthem, burning of the flag, or other forms of expressions they deem "un-American". That's not even mentioning the Republican obsession with controlling "obscenity" on TV and other public media. [1] https://www.rubio.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2021/9/new-rubio-bill-helps-shareholders-fight-back-against-woke-corporations https://www.rubio.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2021/9/new-rub...