Trump

[Aiden]

I don't know what you're talking about, but there's definitely no irony in the news these days

"Cops are looking into it"...aka we were in attendance and found no reason to intervene with these patriot's rights to protest.

[Skynet]

Well that is a thing... strange that the media waited till this election to plaster that all over the news. Plus it could be argued that what is stated in Section 3 is not meant to be used as a 'title' like it has in the media, but is simply how it is being worded as a reference to who was elected based on the results of the Electoral College.

I'm not sure what you're getting at. What exactly is the problem with calling Biden President-Elect?

Well you got me there, they are private companies and free speech does not apply on their platforms. Sure they are suppressing 'worthy targets' at the moment, but what happens when they just decide to suppress more and more ideas that they don't like. They do have a heavy left-leaning basis in what they suppress, which is sad considering what good they could do if they didn't do that kind of crap, but hey... that is the purpose of alt tech. You suppress peoples free speech and opinions and they will take them else were.

Are we talking free speech in the legal sense, or a philosophical sense?

[Haibane]

They do have a heavy left-leaning basis in what they suppress, which is sad considering what good they could do if they didn't do that kind of crap. You suppress peoples free speech and opinions and they will take them else were.

Once again you are really pushing this lazy argument far further that you reasonably can. Is suppressing hate speech, seditious talk, incitements to violence and similar discussions "that kind of crap" to you? The world is suffering hundreds of thousands dead from a dreadful pandemic and we now have vaccines that may be a game changer and people are spreading disinformation about them that will cost lives. Is that "crap" to you?

Proud Boys, Three Percenters and similar white supremacist groups use these platforms to organise marches and protests against a democratically elected government in which people are stabbed and beaten and BLM church signs are stamped on and burned. FB and Twitter are trying to close down the discussion groups they use to organise these events. Is doing that "crap" to you?

[Skynet]

To clarify, in the US legal sense private corporations can censor whoever they want on their platforms for any reason. It only becomes a civil rights issue if the government is passing laws and using the power of the State in the same manner. The fear about the reach of corporations and propaganda is a very understandable one, especially when so many of them have more wealth than the GDP of many nations and can influence political candidates via lobbying. Regulation of corporate activity is a reasonable suggestion, much like any other vital social function or industry.

But the conservative concerns about people being banned from social media are novel for rather two reasons: one, it's rather uniquely anticapitalist strain among the Right, in that it really boils down to putting a leash on industry. Two, it's rather laser-focused in applying mostly to hate speech and not say, anti-union legislation or "right to work" states allowing employers to fire people for no reason, so it often shows where their priorities lie.

That being said, I'm against US government intervention in regards to this barring some rather extreme instances, in that such restrictions can also be wielded the opposite way: I certainly don't trust Republican legislatures to weigh in on what qualifies as hate speech, for instance.

[Haibane]

Hopping back to my last post I wanted to add this to it:

Incitement to violence, race hate and incitement to do acts of sedition isn't free speech either so no problem suppressing those I don't think. Even if such discussion goes elsewhere (where exactly will it go? Where is there other than the internet that allows these groups to so effectively organise and communicate?) that is not a valid reason for social media not to do all it can to make it stop.

[Regina Minx]

how much they seemed to obsessed with the Russia thing...

In what way does 'the Russia thing' seek to disenfranchise voters because the preferred candidate of the party didn't win?

...calling the current election the most secure we have had...

That was actually the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency, AKA part of the Trump administration itself.

when all that crap kept going on in my home state

What crap? You haven't made a single factual allegation of fact.

[CrownedSun]

Dealing with bigotry yes... 'dangerous misinformation'... that is a big no. I say this because the idea of the social media and other big tech mega-corps becoming the arbiters of what is misinformation and what is not sounds like a dangerous direction to go. The last people I want to have dictating that kind of stuff is a small group of CEO's in Silicon Valley.

It sure is a same that we don't have some kind... oh.. Federal Statute that requires balance in media and holds up an ideal of seeing both sides of an issue. That seeks information rather than propaganda. It would be, you know, some kind of... Fairness.. Doctrine.. It seems a simple enough thing that would go a long way toward protecting a fundamental aspect of the American Experience. That would have been a very nice thing to have, I suppose, but oh well. Nothing left to do but trust Big Buisness to police these things.

...where do I go to get my cyberware installed, BTW..? Since we're living in a cyberpunk dystopia?

Oh and just to point this out... Biden isn't exactly considered lawfully elected until the Electoral College process is finished(even if it is kinda obvious he is going to win). The media calling him 'President-elect'... yeah... there is no such title.   

This has been standard practice since as long as I've been alive, which is over 40 years, so this is just an intellectually dishonest take on things.

[Sara Nilsson]

Also, the FBI and republicans in congress did say that the Russia thing really did happen. The republicans didn't just feel it was enough to toss out Trump over. So it was an actually proven thing. Unlike all the shit Trump is spewing over the election.

[Skynet]

To be fair, the Fairness Doctrine asking for "both sides" can also just as easily contribute to disinformation, especially in cases when one side is blatantly dishonest. It's also one that hasn't really been enforced. Even during the Doctrine's existence we didn't see people who believed that flouride in drinking water getting free platforms. For good reason mind you, but I don't think that bringing back the Doctrine is a good idea in this day and age.

That being said, the repeal of the Doctrine did allow right-wing talk radio to flourish due to the fact that they had no mandate to report the factual side of things. Why appeal to reason when you can appeal to fear?

[Andol]

Once again you are really pushing this lazy argument far further that you reasonably can. Is suppressing hate speech, seditious talk, incitements to violence and similar discussions "that kind of crap" to you? The world is suffering hundreds of thousands dead from a dreadful pandemic and we now have vaccines that may be a game changer and people are spreading disinformation about them that will cost lives. Is that "crap" to you?

Proud Boys, Three Percenters and similar white supremacist groups use these platforms to organise marches and protests against a democratically elected government in which people are stabbed and beaten and BLM church signs are stamped on and burned. FB and Twitter are trying to close down the discussion groups they use to organise these events. Is doing that "crap" to you?

Ah... now this is a loaded question if I have ever seen one. You do know that I am not talking about that stuff, but instead quite a few rather benign conservative people who are getting suppressed on these various platforms. Sure they are supressing groups that need to be given the harm they cause, but they do it using blanket algorithms that end up affecting people who have nothing to do with that.

I'm not sure what you're getting at. What exactly is the problem with calling Biden President-Elect?

Are we talking free speech in the legal sense, or a philosophical sense?

Meh I guess it is less a problem with it, and more that they have never done this before. At least not in my life-time so it just felt really off.

I have to admit I have never really heard of it like that. Again as I said before it is the fact these platforms are not using blanket algorithms of 'words you can't say'... to the point that it seem to be causing problems for conservative commentators or ones who talk about conservative subjects in a way that isn't a good look. I mean maybe they are not doing it on purpose, and it is probably just a result of a couple of bad apples ruining things for everyone, but that being said these companies could be a bit less lazy when it comes to how they check things. 

In what way does 'the Russia thing' seek to disenfranchise voters because the preferred candidate of the party didn't win?

That was actually the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency, AKA part of the Trump administration itself.

What crap? You haven't made a single factual allegation of fact.

Here in Georgia we had a few counties that really really screwed up the handling of the votes and as well as the method of storage on drives and other various things.

... Because of how long the Russia thing was dragged out only to prove nothing, wasting a hell of a lot of time that could have just been spent on other things. It just felt like they were doing the same thing Trump is doing now. Looking for anything to throw at the wall and hoping it will stick.

It sure is a same that we don't have some kind... oh.. Federal Statute that requires balance in media and holds up an ideal of seeing both sides of an issue. That seeks information rather than propaganda. It would be, you know, some kind of... Fairness.. Doctrine.. It seems a simple enough thing that would go a long way toward protecting a fundamental aspect of the American Experience. That would have been a very nice thing to have, I suppose, but oh well. Nothing left to do but trust Big Buisness to police these things.

...where do I go to get my cyberware installed, BTW..? Since we're living in a cyberpunk dystopia?

This has been standard practice since as long as I've been alive, which is over 40 years, so this is just an intellectually dishonest take on things.

It is a shame isn't... oh well... what is a law if you don't enforce it on the mega-corps

I would actually like to see evidence of them calling the last couple of President for the last 30 years... I mean I certainly don't remember it happening in my lifetime, until now, meh.

[Oniya]

Oh and just to point this out... Biden isn't exactly considered lawfully elected until the Electoral College process is finished(even if it is kinda obvious he is going to win). The media calling him 'President-elect'... yeah... there is no such title.   

https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/takeaway/articles/12316-president-elect-obamas-path-white-house - used for Obama
https://www.defense.gov/observe/photo-gallery/igphoto/2002018990/ - used on the Department of Defense's own website for Bush and Cheney.

[Andol]

https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/takeaway/articles/12316-president-elect-obamas-path-white-house - used for Obama
https://www.defense.gov/observe/photo-gallery/igphoto/2002018990/ - used on the Department of Defense's own website for Bush and Cheney.

I stand corrected... thank you for that Oniya. I guess I just never noticed those things at the time.

[Sara Nilsson]

... Because of how long the Russia thing was dragged out only to prove nothing, wasting a hell of a lot of time that could have just been spent on other things. It just felt like they were doing the same thing Trump is doing now. Looking for anything to throw at the wall and hoping it will stick.

yeah thats a lie. The report proved there was russian interference.

[Skynet]

I have to admit I have never really heard of it like that. Again as I said before it is the fact these platforms are not using blanket algorithms of 'words you can't say'... to the point that it seem to be causing problems for conservative commentators or ones who talk about conservative subjects in a way that isn't a good look. I mean maybe they are not doing it on purpose, and it is probably just a result of a couple of bad apples ruining things for everyone, but that being said these companies could be a bit less lazy when it comes to how they check things. 

When asked why social media companies didn't take stronger action againsts white supremacists using their platforms, it was because a lot of Republican congressmen would get swept up as a result.

This isn't an exaggeration. I've covered it in prior posts here and elsewhere, but the Republicans, Trump Administration, Fox News, and the broader conservative movement as a whole has been compromised and has normalized rhetoric from white supremacist groups. Whether it is...

Tucker Carlson, the most-watched show on Fox News...

...or President Trump, who 70 million Americans voted for...

Or the decades' worth of bigoted policies arising from the Southern Strategy, taking a stand against hate speech necessarily means taking a stand against American conservatism.

I would actually like to see evidence of them calling the last couple of President for the last 30 years... I mean I certainly don't remember it happening in my lifetime, until now, meh.

Here's a good fact-checking by Reuters.

[Andol]

yeah thats a lie. The report proved there was russian interference.

Yeah, but if that is the case the fact that nothing happened due to result of any findings... it just didn't provide a good look. So all it appeared to be was one side kicking and screaming over nothing for a long period of time. I mean it is similar to what big deal with the emails... it just became another government circus act with no result.

When asked why social media companies didn't take stronger action againsts white supremacists using their platforms, it was because a lot of Republican congressmen would get swept up as a result.

This isn't an exaggeration. I've covered it in prior posts here and elsewhere, but the Republicans, Trump Administration, Fox News, and the broader conservative movement as a whole has been compromised and has normalized rhetoric from white supremacist groups. Whether it is...

Tucker Carlson, the most-watched show on Fox News...

...or President Trump, who 70 million Americans voted for...

Or the decades' worth of bigoted policies arising from the Southern Strategy, taking a stand against hate speech necessarily means taking a stand against American conservatism.

Here's a good fact-checking by Reuters.

I mean if your opinion on the matter is to find confirmation basis to apply such negative statements with a board stroke to a very large group of the American public... then I don't know how to reply to that to be honest.

[Skynet]

It's not really confirmation bias when a party's leadership consistently advocates for a certain position and associates with a certain crowd of people. The sources speak for themselves.

[Andol]

It's not really confirmation bias when a party's leadership consistently advocates for a certain position and associates with a certain crowd of people. The sources speak for themselves.

Yeah, but it is the 70 million American's part that was thrown in. It made me wonder what you where implying with that statement, which sounded like exactly what I was saying.

[Sara Nilsson]

Yeah, but if that is the case the fact that nothing happened due to result of any findings... it just didn't provide a good look. So all it appeared to be was one side kicking and screaming over nothing for a long period of time. I mean it is similar to what big deal with the emails... it just became another government circus act with no result.

If all you where watching was right wing media sure. But the rest of us saw.. yeah.. there was interference but the republicans decided to cover Trumps ass due to being gutless cowards.

[CrownedSun]

yeah thats a lie. The report proved there was russian interference.

The report proved that everything that had been said in the media was true, it just wasn't illegal, because... reasons..

n' that the President Obstructed Justice.

<.<

I'm still amazed sometimes that the "I was exonerated!" thing actually worked.

[Andol]

If all you where watching was right wing media sure. But the rest of us saw.. yeah.. there was interference but the republicans decided to cover Trumps ass due to being gutless cowards.

No... that was the way it looked from all version of media I saw it on. Besides I prefer independent media than the usual big media. Also I was talking about the whole thing in general... both sides of the isle.

[Skynet]

Yeah, but it is the 70 million American's part that was thrown in. It made me wonder what you where implying with that statement, which sounded like exactly what I was saying.

It's not inconceivable that huge groups of people can back hatemongers. It certainly happened with anti-LGBT rhetoric in Poland, or anti-Tutsi sentiment in Rwanda, or Klansmen senators in the Jim Crow South. It's a hard pill to swallow, but as has been said and observed by many disenfranchised groups, prejudice is systemic and there are many Americans who even if not cross-burning types are all too happy to tolerate and support their presence for some perceived benefit.

[Skynet]

No... that was the way it looked from all version of media I saw it on. Besides I prefer independent media than the usual big media. Also I was talking about the whole thing in general... both sides of the isle.

Also asking out of curiosity, what independent media sources are you getting your information from?

[CrownedSun]

If all you where watching was right wing media sure. But the rest of us saw.. yeah.. there was interference but the republicans decided to cover Trumps ass due to being gutless cowards.

To be totally fair, "The russian thing was all smoke and mirrors and there was nothing there," has somehow become THE take more or less everywhere.

It doesn't even surprise me when people believe that these days because the idea that what was said to happen,-- actually happened,- and THERE WAS NO CONSEQUENCE?

That reads like bad fiction.

Even if it's the truth.

Just like what happened with Ukraine.

[Fox Lokison]

Proud Boys, Three Percenters and similar white supremacist groups use these platforms to organise marches and protests against a democratically elected government in which people are stabbed and beaten and BLM church signs are stamped on and burned. FB and Twitter are trying to close down the discussion groups they use to organise these events. Is doing that "crap" to you?

This is... slightly incorrect. Emphasis on slightly for a reason. While those groups were at one point using those sites, they got wise very fast. They moved to their own social media hubs and forums a while back. What they mainly use Twitter and Facebook for is not organizing so much as attracting new members. While some small scale organizing does happen on social media sites, these groups pathologically distrust big brother, and they see big tech as part of that. The smart and savvy ones aren't doing much organizing on those sites anymore. Stupid ones tho? Most definitely. Then they get shut down, and they're either smart enough to find their way to their other sites, or stupid enough to keep doing the same old shit.

Not that addressing those sites isn't important. It is. You're definitely gonna catch the more overt and aggressive members of these groups. Just not the smart ones.

It's that whole iceberg metaphor. What's not visible is the more dangerous part.

It's not inconceivable that huge groups of people can back hatemongers. It certainly happened with anti-LGBT rhetoric in Poland, or anti-Tutsi sentiment in Rwanda, or Klansmen senators in the Jim Crow South. It's a hard pill to swallow, but as has been said and observed by many disenfranchised groups, prejudice is systemic and there are many Americans who even if not cross-burning types are all too happy to tolerate and support their presence for some perceived benefit.

So this is actually my wheelhouse, as it were. This is ridiculously accurate. The average person wants a handful of things. They want security. They want to feel safe in their homes and their community. They want a stable income, financial security, some way to survive. They want food. They want the ability to continue practicing their culture, religion, or lifestyle without threat.

This makes the masses VERY easy to manipulate with Trump's rhetoric. It specifically targets all those things, and plays on the fears of unease in communities. Integration is a looooong process. Cultures and religions and ethnicities take time to find common ground between them and an accord. Trump took office during major demographic shifts, in age, politics, ethnicity, and religion, and he used all of those to slow integration and sow animosity among the American people.

In the end, it doesn't actually matter if you actively did the bad thing, just enabled it, were a shield for it, or allowed it to happen.  At the end of the day, the damage was done, and complicity is complicity. We're all complicit in looking the other way on something, or ignoring it. We're all prioritizing our own needs, because if we did, we wouldn't be alive. It's about the severity of what you're complicit in.

And the rise of right wing nationalism, authoritarianism, and even budding fascism didn't come about without the support of those 70 million Americans, and wont grind to a halt unless some of them start working against the thing they helped create.

[TheHangedOne]

No... that was the way it looked from all version of media I saw it on. Besides I prefer independent media than the usual big media. Also I was talking about the whole thing in general... both sides of the isle.

I like independent media. Can you make some suggestions?