Who isn't Fukkin sick to death of some assshole protecting everyone from misinformation? How convenient, don't agree, call it misinformation, censor it,doing society a favor. Ohh,SHUT UP!

"Who isn't Fukkin sick to death of some assshole protecting everyone from misinformation? How convenient, don't agree, call it misinformation, censor it,doing society a favor. Ohh,SHUT UP!"

 This is part of why I consistently say social media is not actual information.  Its overwhelmingly opinions spread as fact with zero credibility or reference.

 First - anyone can post anything without evidence.

 Second - the type of information sent forward can be selective.

And that’s a good way to look at it. When you hear this story, just imagine the FBI pulling the soapbox out from under a guy questioning the actions of his government and tell me if you’re good with that.


 If he's on a soapbox that is a Private Company's property of a Company that asked the FBI to go grab that soapbox, I would question the Company's values and not support that company.  I definitely would not cry about my "Rights" being violated on their soap box on their property.

 I'd go to their competitor before I would try to control their actions by exercising rights I don't have there.

 Now if a private company asked the FBI to go pull out somebody else's soapbox, I would have an issue with that for sure from both the Company and the FBI.

 Most important of all I wouldn't use the soapbox in exclusivity to make important decisions anyway since we all know what opinions are like.

From Jonathan Turley article this morning:

What Censorship?

One of the old saws of censorship apologists is that without a government directing the suppression of free speech, it is not censorship.  

That is clearly untrue.  Many groups like the ACLU stress that "censorship can be carried out by the government as well as private pressure groups."

The same figures insist that if, there is not a violation of the First Amendment (which only applies to the government), there is no free speech violation.

The First Amendment was never the exclusive definition of free speech. Free speech is viewed by many of us as a human right; the First Amendment only deals with one source for limiting it. Free speech can be undermined by private corporations as well as government agencies.

It was pointed out, on Fox News The Five of all places, that Biden's request to Twitter was to remove Hunter's nude pic's which break Twitter's rules against revenge porn, and Biden was a private citizen at the time of the request.
Trump on the other hand, also made censorship requests, and was President at the time.

Which one is a 1st amendment breach?

Ok, so I looked and can’t find any published accounts of what Trump asked Twitter to censor. The fact is of course they never would’ve done what he has anyway but I’d like to know specifically, assuming he did, what are you ask them to withhold from the public sharing with others?

Actually, a better analogy is to imagine the FBI telling the owner of the soapbox company to pull soapboxes out on people who were about to reveal the head of the FBI was a crook.


 So how is the Company violating your 1st Amendment rights?  You don't have the right to use that soapbox to begin with.

Isn't that the same James Baker..................

https://dailycaller.com/2022/12/04/james-baker-hunter-biden-laptop-fisa-censor/

Move along.......................

Best regards,