Silicon Valley Companies Are Starting to Doubt Concept of Free Speech

>>169636

“And so the notion of free speech is shifting at the companies that run the internet. Facebook had a reckoning after false stories on its News Feed—free speech, in a sense—may have helped elect Donald Trump,” they continued. “Perhaps not coincidentally, the company changed its mission statement this past June.”

“To Systrom, it’s pretty simple: Freedom of speech does not mean the freedom to shitpost,” Wired proclaimed. “His network isn’t a public square; it’s a platform people can choose to use or not.”
When Systrom was asked about free speech, the CEO reportedly replied: “Is it free speech to just be mean to someone?”

Nicky Jackson Colaco, Instagram’s director of policy, also claimed, “If toxicity on a platform gets so bad that people don’t even want to post a comment, they don’t even want to share an idea, you’ve actually threatened expression.”

On Tuesday, Instagram suspended popular conservative commentator and author Lauren Southern before restoring her account around seven hours later.

The account was only restored after Breitbart Tech reached out to Instagram for comment, prompting a spokesman for the company to claim they had “mistakenly suspended her account.”

Instagram’s parent company Facebook, however, haspreviouslysuspended Southern in “error,” while Patreon alsobannedthe commentator last month, claiming her work could potentially get people killed.

FIN

>>169636

I'd imagine the tech industry severely overestimated the intelligence of the American populace. We still have 25% signaling "strong support" for President shit-for-brains. It's amazing these people have the cognitive function to automatically breath let alone continue existing for more than 72 hours.

>>169640
There is a significant portion of our population who just don't care about politics, all that matters is if they're going to be employed or not. Lazy niggers don't even care if said employment will be garbage like coal mining because they can't be bothered to get the education/training required for a decent job. Working class gonna working class.

>>169640

"Scratch a conservative and you find someone who prefers the past over any future.
Scratch a liberal and find a closet aristocrat."
-- Frank Herbert --

>>169642
Btfo, how will politicfags ever recover?

>>169641
There is literally nothing wrong with this. No one who doesn't care about politics has ever tried to take my rights away or impose their beliefs on me through the rule of law.

>>169645
Good goy

>>169640
Didn't you mean, "*breathe?"

How exactly are the conservatives the nazis, when the Democrats are literally trying to remove all your rights?

>>169694
Because according to the news media they've killed someone and worship nazis and the kkk. Thus a good enough reason to call conservatices nazis.

facebook is watching huh, good think I have an instagram. lmao

>>169640
>. We still have 25% signaling "strong support" for President shit-for-brains.
Which "President shit-for-brains" are you referring to? Trump or hillary?

>some of whom are pop singers dealing with an infestation of snakes

Wait what?

>>169694
Yeah, the Democrats are trying to attack your right to marry who you want, the right to do marijuana if you want, the right to make decisions about the fetus in your body. Oh wait, shit I got that wrong, they only are attacking your right to buy a lethal weapon without getting a background check, and the right of rich people to be free from progressive taxes.

Like this is something new? LMAO! Who ever posted this is just stupid. Asleep @ the wheel or stirring up absolute dumbness. The blind leading the blind. Rights? We have no rights.....Chew on that for a while... Whoever says get of facebook is so misled.... How about get of this earth cause were all a bunch of worker bees in one big hive. Maybe the word resistance might start making sense in your dumbed down slave brains...

>>169780
Lol nice straw man.
They are clearly trying to condemn free speech. A year in jail for accidentally calling someone the wrong pro noun might become a thing in California.

Literally jailed for wrong think because some people didn't like what you said.

Free speech is a right. Guns are a right.
Marijuana and abortions are not.
Take a fucking civics class.

>>169780
>Who cares if free speech on the internet is destroyed, we have weed now
Kill yourself you Commie scum.

>>169787
>Take a fucking civics class.

High schools don't offer civics classes anymore due to the overwhelming focus on standardized testing.

>>169637
>If toxicity [irl] gets so bad that people don’t even want to [say] a comment, they don’t even want to share an idea, you’ve actually threatened expression.

If this nation wants to survive then all Commies in the US must be exterminated.

>>169787

Use of pot is
, you backwards hick faggot

>>169793
>something's a right because I said so
>t. Leftist college student
Cry more you pot riddled waste of space.

>>169791
>if someone is insecure it's because someone else made them that way and we should limit the others persons rights because of it.

Did I get that right?

>>169642
I thought the saying behind every "progressive" is an authoritarian.

>>169640
More like 42% you liberal faggot.

>>169780
>Marijuana when you want
State rights? It's getting legalized. Also, the DNC is muh tobacco companies

>Fetus
Human life, not your right to end it because of your fuck ups

>Marry who you want
Slippery slope, you can't marry children, animals, and more than one person either. What about their rights?

Tard, noone cares about these things anyways. They're like the non issues of the 21st century.

>>169636
>starting to

>>169780
>to attack your right to marry who you want
Gay marriage is legal in all 50 states. You forget that a Republican on the SCOTUS voted for it.

>the right to do marijuana if you want, the right to make decisions about the fetus in your body.

>muh weed

Obama doubled down on the federal raids and did nothing to push for it to be federally decriminalized when he had the chance.

That fetus is also a human being and your fucking child. Most Republicans are not even pushing to ban abortion, but to remove federal funding for it. Completely different

>they only are attacking your right to buy a lethal weapon without getting a background check

You're not making any sense here.

>the right of rich people to be free from progressive taxes.

And now you're just trolling

>>169780

Trump is highly in favor of gay rights

>>169640
The tech industry seems to facing the same problem libertarians face. What happens when you let people do whatever the fuck they want.

The only difference here is the tech companies are getting to play out their fantasies to its logical extent while the libs are still defending "muh roads" and how corporations wont' take over everything.

are there any conservatives remaining that understand what is meant by "free speech"

>>169782
You have to be over 18 to post here.

>>169715
>>169866

Case example of Trump supporters everyone. One that doesn't know who the current president is, one that can't differentiate between "strong support" and "somewhat support."

Truly bottom barrel members of society.

>breitbart
do they even pretend to be news

>>169920
>Case example of Trump supporters everyone
?????????
Fucking retard. Here is an example of a poster who can't read the context of a post and lets his biases run wild confusing things for that they aren't because they are paranoid of trump supporters. I know who the president is, I was making a joke about how both sides are fucking retarded. If hillary was in power you would probably being going on about how 75% of the population is retarded for not support your president in arms.

>>169920
Fag shill libs are sad people

>>169933

Aw look it. Poor Trumpy shill thinks 75% would be upset if Hillary had leaked intel to the Russians. It's okay, if you cry and yell buzzwords enough you'll at least LOOK like you have something of substance to anyone that takes less than a glance at your ill read shit posts.

>>169940

50% of that post was buzzwords. Nicely done.

>>169636
it's there fault for getting in bed with career politicians with "think of the children" agendas.

>>169945
Fag shill lib still at it

If only you put so much effort doing anything else

>>169780
But you DO need a background check to purchase all firearms except black powder shit

>>169868
Fuck off Cletus

the free market will fix this

>>169636
Private tech companies policing content on platforms that they own is not a violation of free speech, for the same reason that if you write to a letter to a newspaper and they don't publish it, they are not violating your free speech. It's their fucking newspaper, and that means they get to decide what goes in it. If you don't like it, you do not have to interact with them.

Free speech means you can't be persecuted under the LAW for speaking your mind. It does not mean that people have to like you no matter what you say, it does not mean that people are not allowed to assess your character when they make employment decisions, and it does not mean that businesses are obligated to publish everything you write. When tech industry lobbyists are lobbying congress to revoke the 1st amendment, then you can accurately say that "support for free speech is starting to dwindle in Silicon Valley". Until then, this is stupid.

>>170118
The extralegal problem is obvious, however. If Facebook and Google happen to agree that you shouldn't get to use their platforms because they don't like what you have to say (whatever that may be), you are essentially banished from the internet thanks to their enormous marketshares.

>>170139
I don't use social media at all and I do not seem to be banished from the Internet. I do use Google search, maps, and news, but there are numerous alternatives to all of those things and boycotting them would be nothing more than inconvenient.

>>170118
>>170179
>you're not entitled to use someone else's website, make your own!

Except now that CloudFlare arbitrarily dumped The Daily Stormer, precedent has been set for domain name registrars to decide that you don't get to have a platform on the internet at all.

>>170179
Say goodbye to your Gmail account(s) and any emails held within. I also hope you like not having a YouTube account.

>>170118
> if you write to a letter to a newspaper and they don't publish it, they are not violating your free speech. It's their fucking newspaper

No, you can’t have a business that’s open to the public, then put up a sign that says “No dogs or Irish”.

Banning people from public social network sites due to their politics, is the same as the phone company canceling your service because they don’t like what you say on your phone.

>>170213
>I use Google's search, maps, and news
>say goodbye to your gmail account
Are you dense? Also, you can use YouTube without an account, you just can't upload or comment. Frankly, I would prefer not to have a YouTube account, but I stay signed in to Google so that it will remember my news feed preferences.

>>170206
Cloudfare apparently starting offering registration services to its customers last year, but they are first and foremost a CDN provider. I don't know if you can even use them as a registrar if you are not a customer. Despite that, they initially refused to take action when GoDaddy and Google did (GoDaddy, unlike Cloudfare, being a big-name domain registrar as well as a hosting provider), and only reversed their position when The Daily Stormer antagonized them (however proud you are of being a neo-nazi, if you do not see the inference that someone else is probably a secret neo-nazi as antagonistic, you are operating on a new level of retardation).

Even if you can't get domain names or hosting (and unless what you're doing is illegal, you can), there are still ways to publish content on the Internet that are extremely censorship resistant. If domain name registrars were using their positions to censor the Internet (which is not happening) that would be troubling and a problem worth doing something about (there are things that you could do about that), but we're not in real trouble until ISPs start banning people.

>>170216
>No, you can’t have a business that’s open to the public, then put up a sign that says “No dogs or Irish”.
That's not the same as putting up a sign that says "do not be openly racist towards our other customers"

>Banning people from public social network sites due to their politics, is the same as the phone company canceling your service because they don’t like what you say on your phone.
That's completely different. That would be analogous to censorship by an ISP, which would be a serious problem. This is more like getting booted from a chat line, which would be a pretty silly thing to cry about.

>>170286
You are not everyone. Are YOU dense?