Refute this one retards

if you just wanted me to post this here it is

Attached: xkpd.png (757x3030, 240K)

should you be able to discriminate based on religion then?

If the free market determines your speech to be harmful enough that your job should be taken then fine. If it's just the outrage police doing it then that's a different question entirely.

the logic is mind busting

Yes, why not?

How is that not an example of the free market in action?

>collectivism always outdoes the individual
>until the individual makes a gun
>then it doesn't matter what you say
Nigger

The argument is correct, your point?

No clue what this means

Stop crying about Alex Jones being banned then

free speech =/= first amendment. I honestly don't give a shit about the first amendment.
Twitter and Google should be nationalized.

Attached: 1399649148624.png (566x577, 97K)

This dull cartoon doesn't even touch the question of whether or not online social media should be considered a public square since its primary service is connectivity (and thus its value rises with the number of people it can connect to a customer, probably meaning it is a natural monopoly). It also doesn't make a distinction between political speech and any other kind of speech.
There's also the fact that social media platforms limit liability by labeling themselves as merely platforms; i.e not responsible for the content which appears on their site.

From: womensmediacenter.com/speech-project/why-social-media-companies-arent-liable-for-abuse-on-their-platforms

>Section 230 of the CDA is, essentially, a declaration of neutrality for platforms. It states that if a company does not actively participate in the creation of content--if all it does is provide a venue for someone to express themselves--then the company is not liable for that content. It doesn’t matter how actionable that content is--how clearly a given utterance constitutes libel, or harassment, or incitement to violence.

So if these companies are deciding to remove people from the platform who aren't violating their TOS, aren't they taking responsibility for the content of their platform? When do they stop being platforms, and start being publishers?
Would any reasonable person consider Twitter or Faceberg to be neutral platforms at this point?

If they aren't, and thus could be open to liability for what is said on their platform, wouldn't it be beneficial then to have regulations mandating neutrality?

But no, this cartoon is just "muh consequences" "muh freedom of association," and I would bet a months worth of whatever this poorfag makes that he doesn't even believe in freedom of association.

What a fag. Also sage for slide thread.

If they editorialize peoples content, they are no longer a platform, they are a publisher.

REFUTED!

Well, I'm not. Still though, don't you think it is a little fucked up?

>censorship is okay if the person doesn't end up in jail

>My ideology will never be bannable because it's popular right now
Do you just lack the ability to see consequences? Are you so quick to forget what giving companies near unlimited power looks like? It's just as bad if not worse than government intervention. Google anything per-unionization of America.
I have never understood banning someone from a website, at the end of the day, if someone is that offensive to you why do you give them the time of day? Why do you have them added on your spynet disguised as (((social media))) anyways?
And the cake argument someone replied to you with, do you actually believe that as an answer or are you just pretending to be stupid?

because tech giants aren't mom and pop shops, they're multi billion dollar monopolies on modern public discourse. We now live in an age where the left is shilling for monopolistic mega-corporations.

>sexual orientation can’t
Arguable
Anyway, it's not necessarily the homosexuality itself the baker was protesting, but the marriage which he didn't want to support.

He's right, you know

Pretty sure he's left actually

>laws and morals are the same

Attached: 1505341244540.png (205x246, 5K)

If they editorialize peoples content, they are no longer a platform, they are a publisher.

If they editorialize peoples content, they are no longer a platform, they are a publisher.

If they editorialize peoples content, they are no longer a platform, they are a publisher.

If they editorialize peoples content, they are no longer a platform, they are a publisher.

If they editorialize peoples content, they are no longer a platform, they are a publisher.

THAT IS THE LAW! LEARN THE LAW.

Free speech, just like any other "right", is a rhetorical trick to get normies to do something that benefits you. It doesn't have to be real or factual, it just has to work.

Yeah the term "Freedom of Speech doesn't protect you from the consequences of your speech" has been interpreted by the left to essentially mean. If you say anything I disagree with I have the right to dox you. Prevent you by speaking by shouting as loud as possible or threatening you with bodily harm. Demand you be fired from your job and will harass your employer until they do. Threaten anyone who associates with you with the same harassment. Thus ensuring your isolated have no means to survive which will result in you no longer exercising your freedom of speech.

Also the thing about banning people from platforms like Twitter and Youtube. They're the equivalent of the town square at this point. Your argument that they need to be kept from speaking in it to the widest audience is just proof of the honest desire to quash free speech.

Free speech and the 1st amendment are not interchangeable terms, midwit.
And any rate no one cares about your definitions of rights. We will do what is in our best interests regardless of the consequences to people like you.

Still their proberty, though.
They can buy the cake somewhere else

>t-they're a private company! If you don't like their service then get out!

Attached: YouTube-Online-Video-Market-Share-Report.jpg (1234x1088, 81K)

>alex jones should be cancelled
>NO NO NO TRUMP DONT BAN CNN FROM THE WHITE HOUSE AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHH FASCISM

I WILL POST THIS UNTIL YOU PEOPLE LEARN.

If they editorialize peoples content, they are no longer a platform, they are a publisher.

If they editorialize peoples content, they are no longer a platform, they are a publisher.

If they editorialize peoples content, they are no longer a platform, they are a publisher.

If they editorialize peoples content, they are no longer a platform, they are a publisher.

If they editorialize peoples content, they are no longer a platform, they are a publisher.

THAT IS THE LAW! LEARN THE LAW.

This is only a comic because the guy has such a big ego that he has to let the world know this shitty political cartoon is from his artstyle. What's the fucking point of making a comic if the visual aspect is completely unnecessary and its just your self-insert preaching to us for 6 panels about your woke politics

The point also falls flat when people are actually starting to support speech restrictions

>>alex jones should be cancelled
and banned from every single platform on the itnernet, as he should for pushing out fake news becasue it's not like it was an entertainment show...
>>NO NO NO TRUMP DONT BAN CNN FROM THE WHITE HOUSE
the media should have access to every home of america!

You'd better be saging every time you post this.

Can't. For some reason, the sage function crashes my browser.

OP, we're not mad at the government and most people knowledgeable about what's going on are not in any way suggesting that these websites like Facebook, Youtube, Google, etc. are violating the law by censoring content. Everyone knows they're well within their legal rights to do so. What we're upset about is the overwhelmingly obvious political bias that websites which dictate common communications between most people and the media they consume, and ALSO the mainstream media news services' continual denial of this political bias because a significant amount of people historically believe what the news has said and it continues to affect the way they act towards people, including us. The power these companies (Facebook, Google, Youtube, etc.) is significant, although completely lawful, and affects us. So we care about how they behave. It isn't about a god-given right to free speech and how that right can be legally enforced; it's about the practical consequences of one-sided censorship.

Does that make sense OP?

liberals dont care. the only people who care that cnn is being kicked out of the white house is cnn. kick them out. trump won in part because cnn showed nonstop coverage of him. theyre fucking symbiotic.

the only press of trump that should exist is a livestream pointing out every single one of his lies on a loop

if people are assholes they should be shunned by society. alex jones is a fucking asshole. this is how society works. if youre an asshole, you will suffer social ostracization. this will happen whether or not theres laws, or free speech protections, whatever. this is just how society naturally works.

>free speech is a thing but don't you dare fucking do it or else you'll lose your job and livelihood and die a homeless bum in the streets but yeah free speech is totally a thing

if you use your free speech to be an asshole then yeah thats the life you deserve

When did the dems start being pro monopoly.
Break up Google, and Microsoft hosting services, otherwise their policies control the entire internet.
Fucking hell, when there is like 2 domain registering websites that de-list views they do not like, there is explicitly a problem.

Eh, isn't that kinda what Russia is doing to the gays? Not wanting to listen to their bullshit?

"Yeah but freedom of speech doesnt mean free from consequences"
>You can't fire NFL protesters for kneeling during the anthem, they have free speech
>Lol, private entities can censor speech all they like
>We need Net Neutrality to have an open internet and stop monopolistic companies from controlling what we can see!!
>well if Google, Facebook & Apple want to erase someone from the internet overnight thats their right dude its their platform they can do what they want

any more examples?

Nobody here disagrees with that. We're just saying it's weird that people can say shit like "kill all white people" and shove gay shit and weird trans shit in people's faces and if you say anything but positive encouraging things about those topics people call you evil and kick you out of places. Like, there's a whole spectrum of opinions that get you shut down no matter how mild they are. It's even weirder because for ages it seemed like most white people held those views and then it just started flipping 100 years ago.

>It's just that the people listening think you're an asshole
This isn't the case all the time.

>Everyone knows they're well within their legal rights to do so.

WRONG!

If they editorialize peoples content, they are no longer a platform, they are a publisher.

If they editorialize peoples content, they are no longer a platform, they are a publisher.

If they editorialize peoples content, they are no longer a platform, they are a publisher.

If they editorialize peoples content, they are no longer a platform, they are a publisher.

If they editorialize peoples content, they are no longer a platform, they are a publisher.

THAT IS THE LAW! LEARN THE LAW.

When websites like Facebook, Youtube, Google, etc. are censoring content, they CEASE to be platforms.

Facebook, Youtube, Google are -NOW- PUBLISHERS, AND THEY ARE AS LEGALLY ACCOUNTABLE AS ANY PUBLISHER IS ACCOUNTABLE!

If you own a monopoly you must give everyone the ability to speak freely. It's not "free speach!!!" If the only place you can speak is somewhere no one is listening. Realistically monopolies such as youtube should have been broken up, but there's no point in doing that if a suitable replacement can't be made. Until then to guarantee free speech monopolies must let everyone speak unless it is physically harmful to someone.

except he wasn't shunned by society

he was shunned by a powerful minority, preventing millions who wanted to hear him from being able to

tyranny is taking away the choices of other people

>the only press of trump that should exist is a livestream pointing out every single one of his lies on a loop
TDS

Attached: 03-kanye-west-donald-trump-2016-billboard-1548.jpg (1548x1024, 1.12M)

>Yuh’dig?

nothing you said made me mad until that last part

What does the stick figure have to do with anything written there? Can the person not draw but wanted to make a comic?

A private business should reserve the right to decide who it wants as its customers.

So then I guess you don't mind if I refuse service to black people?

Your "society" sounds more like the law of power, so no one should have sympathy for you if your life gets ruined by the opinion makers of a "society" you don't agree with. Now are you sure you want to keep playing this game?

Attached: smuggy - echo chamber.jpg (1028x543, 93K)

go to:

You are a huge faggot. Let me guess you reserve the right to determine what is asshole speech? There is a reason that back in the day we were allowed to beat fags like you and no one cared.

correct horse battery staple

Attached: 1516055420922.jpg (335x208, 9K)

if someones listening to an asshole, and they dont think hes an asshole, guess what?

that guy is also an asshole

and assholes can have a whole little island to themselves to be assholes to each other. thats your gab and whatever. you get to have that. its like your little internet country, look at that! you can go be an asshole there with all your little asshole friends! but the mainstream is the mainstream, and the mainstream is kinda resistant to assholes. its just that we have an asshole president and he dictates the, well, tone of things. so i guess the assholes are having their day. but its been god knows how long, 3 years? since the beginning of this shit? its really time to get put you guys back into the little box where you came from.

this is the internet curing itself of a disease. its already starting and its not going to stop.

go to:

Unless you own a monopoly. If I have a right to something and you have a monopoly on that thing I must be able to use that platform or else I don't have that right.

Aside from the fact that this amendment was created a time when it was inconceivable that a corporation would hold more power than a government and therefore it wasn't necessary to preemptively limit their power in order to protect our basic rights. The constitution does not provide you with your rights. It creates legal limits on power for the presumed ruling authority in order to safe guard your existing rights which you automatically and unequivocally always have. The violation of these rights is immoral, they are among the most sacred values of our society and anyone trying to play rule/word games is completely missing the point of inalienable rights.

Large corporations are not simply private businesses. Their power is large and far reaching and they need to be brought to heel now that their influence has extended far beyond what was once considered normal. Companies like google need to be regulated, they need to be reclassified as utilities and they should not be allowed to arbitrary deplatform people without oversight or clear guidelines. Google saying 'lol u cant post that' in 2018 is like the power company randomly decided "lol lets turn off that guy's electricity because he's a x y or z ;)".

This idea that it's bad for the government to do something but it's totally okay for a dystopian corporation to do it simply because 'they are a company' is absolutely insane and completely shits on the very concept of freedom of speech. What you are doing is elevating corporations above government and assigning them political, economic, and damn near spiritual power to rule over the masses with no way to check or balance their power and influence. That is completely detrimental to the health our society and is basically treason.

If you can't effectively exercise a right then that right doesn't exist.

No, you see we will change the terms around and it will be totally different.

see this right here is what is called "asshole speech." this guy, if he said this in real life, would be spotted as a major asshole, and everyone would avoid him. thats a "consequence". you cant get mad over that because youre the reason everyones avoiding you. but you do get mad anyway, because guess what? youre an asshole! and youre gonna be mad and abuse random people on the internet because thats how you get that out of your system. but you gotta get over that dude. thats the reason you're alone and want to kill yourself.

>when did the dems start being pro monopoly

when they got their hands on some monopolies. the left is comically hypocritical and in a post-truth political climate they get away with it every time they want to.

what? so discrimination based on religion or political affiliation is grounds for deplatforming is fine, but not if your a faggot, because theyre 'born that way'?

what if i was born a white supremacist lesbian attack helicopter nazi? cant deplatform me because muh pussy licking right?

This.

Communication is becoming a basic human right, these companies have a monopoly on a basic service at this point and are discriminating against certain segments of the population due to their ideas.

Imagine if the phone company decided to no platform you as a subscriber because of your political beliefs or business affiliations. This is what's happening, collusion and monopoly control as well as violating the spirit of the first.

Pic very much related. That shitty cartoon has always been wrong on this point due to scope.

It's fine for your small business, it's fine for a bakery, it's not fine for the entity that is more powerful than the government. If someone buys up all water and doesn't sell to conservatives, it's wrong. If someone buys up all the digital space, and doesn't sell to conservatives, it's wrong.

Attached: roseanne_first.png (930x780, 792K)

Yeah, like you call people assholes all the time in meatspace.

Attached: smuggy - unamerican.jpg (730x504, 52K)

You should thank us for definitively demonstrating that dickhead false with letting this thread exist. A whole lot of anons here think you're an asshole and want you to fuck off, but no, they'll still tolerate it. You can still speak your mind, no matter how small. You could post all the bait in the world, and not one mod will prune it for at least an hour. Take this (You), and do something more productive than spouting shit for giggles.

No, they'll just say you being born that way is a defect and send you to reeducation classes to "fix" you.

dont need to. assholes are easy to spot. heres one now, i can tell by his use of the term "meatspace"

The comic owners don't own the platform because they don't own the internet. Nor do they own the technology in which to present their comic. They are accessing an existing foundation. The comic creator has as much right to their shitty opinion as I do to call them a wrong faggot and that's too bad. The internet is not their platform. Its everyone's.
Democracy is a sham and always has been a sham. Stop touting it as some kind of universal intrinsic property of politics. Its a single form of politics among many.

Oh no! Is that going to get me banned from society?! Heavens forbid!

who does that? thats literally the right wing christian fucks sending gays to gay deprogramming camps, not the other way around. how are your delusions so completely the opposite of what the real world is actually like?

*claps in digital*

>"our ideas are superior, which is why no dissenting ideas will be allowed."

I'll just leave this here
amren.com/taylor-v-twitter-press-release/

>OP (and that snobby anti-american cartoonist) btfo

Attached: Taylor v. Twitter Press Release - American Renaissance.png (670x211, 21K)

Everyone is not avoiding him though, a few gatekeepers built a digital wall around him due to their monopolistic control.

People aren't avoiding him, the problem for the gatekeepers is actually that he is too popular, so they built their digital wall.

So you're saying that these statements are exactly the same and if you say this you should be isolated, lose your job, have your life threatened, and be banned from public speaking.

>You are a huge faggot.
>We need a castration lottery for white men.
>I do not believe that there was any collusion with Russia.
>Kill all men

Well...faggot?

i dont need to ban you from society. i literally dont have to do anything. youre already suffering from your punishment for being an asshole. youre posting on pol on a saturday night. you dont have any friends dude. thats what happens when youre an asshole.

I can't wait for the Cali SC to get raped when they reverse polarity on this, then they get raped in the SC again. The 9th entire judicial needs to come under review as well.

The tech oligarchs have to know they won't get away with this long term, it's obv. a midterm strategy.

you need an IQ higher than 120 to understand, so naturally leftists are precluded from having a functional opinion on the subject.

Attached: 1508141091481.png (757x3030, 960K)

You are completely and utterly lacking in self-awareness.

Attached: female double standards.jpg (577x1024, 59K)

I rest my case , your faggotry.

Attached: xkcd faggot.png (740x633, 44K)

Correct, you have slid much of the population to Jow Forums due to Streisand effect of too many leftists controlling too many platforms.

We'll see how this works out for you in the long run. You think it's just Jow Forums. You think the people that don't want to be around leftist drones have no power and influence because that's what your virtue signalling buddies tell you. That's what the press tells you.

The backlash is going to be immense, it will start when you lose seats in midterms.

Try again nigger, being gay is a mental illness because it stops you primary purpose as a human being, reproducing, and instead replaces it with the urge to shove you penis in another man's colon. No matter how you spin it homosexuality is a mental illness.
Racism, however, is shown to be naturally occurring in all humans and not contrary to our nature at all. The left has tried to "cure" it for years with propaganda, university reeducation, and social buzzwords.
express.co.uk/news/uk/611992/Scientists-experiment-magnets-immigrants-God-magnetic-waves

I WILL POST THIS UNTIL YOU PEOPLE LEARN.

If they editorialize peoples content, they are no longer a platform, they are a publisher.

If they editorialize peoples content, they are no longer a platform, they are a publisher.

If they editorialize peoples content, they are no longer a platform, they are a publisher.

If they editorialize peoples content, they are no longer a platform, they are a publisher.

If they editorialize peoples content, they are no longer a platform, they are a publisher.

THAT IS THE LAW! LEARN THE LAW.

>begging the question the comic
Come on, oversimplifying freedom of speech and how government regulates? Cripes weak bait.

>being gay is a mental illness because it stops you primary purpose as a human being, reproducing
So lurking on Jow Forums is also a mental illness?

If there is only one major platform on the internet for your free speech like youtube, then it is censorship.

With hollywood being agressively against the right they are the only ones that have a voice there as well.

If a bunch of rioters decide to show up to your event causing it to get cancelled, then that is censorship too.

Free speech is a great thing and even things I don't agree with should be allowed.

I watched this video of these guys going to Japan and the hotel they were staying at had pamphlets and shit that were very anti Chinese, but it was allowed.

This is a good thing because now those guys know what that hotel owner believes in and since they vehemently disagree with it they can just stay at a different hotel next time.

What does this mean?

If Alex Jones' opinions are so wrong and insane then you should be able to easily challenge them, reveling in his deplatforming is a subtle admission that you're too intellectually weak and lazy to refute Jones.

Let's be fair here, speaking out against Chinese tourists is more of a public service than anything.

Attached: image.jpg (740x272, 78K)