Facebook, Apple, YouTube and Spotify ban Infowars' Alex Jones

[AuH20]

Just for the record, there is nothing in the Net neutrality reg that would have spared Infowars from this ban. I guess maybe it would have prevented ISP from throttling the connection speed to their website but that is it.

I think some people claiming these social media sites are public utility and should abide by the first amendment should be very careful. I have heard people like AuH20 make the connection that since some social media websites got tax breaks from govt should be treated as a public utility. Those same people should know that the same arguments can be made to justify net neutrality. I know the precedent set here would likely to come back and hurt me but I will still defend the right of the public company to boot infowars from their platform.

I think they should have their tax breaks stripped. I don't want to control them. They can discriminate without tax breaks if they choose to do so.

 

[Swordsmyth]

In A Corporatist System Of Government, Corporate Censorship Is State Censorship

Last year, representatives of Facebook, Twitter, and Google were instructed on the US Senate floor that it is their responsibility to “quell information rebellions” and adopt a “mission statement” expressing their commitment to “prevent the fomenting of discord.”

“Civil wars don’t start with gunshots, they start with words,” the representatives were told. “America’s war with itself has already begun. We all must act now on the social media battlefield to quell information rebellions that can quickly lead to violent confrontations and easily transform us into the Divided States of America.”

Yes, this really happened.

Today Twitter has silenced three important anti-war voices on its platform: it has suspended Daniel McAdams, the executive director of the Ron Paul Institute, suspended Scott Horton of the Scott Horton Show, and completely removed the account of prominent Antiwar.com writer Peter Van Buren.

I’m about to talk about the censorship of Alex Jones and Infowars now, so let me get the “blah blah I don’t like Alex Jones” thing out of the way so that my social media notifications aren’t inundated with people saying “Caitlin didn’t say the ‘blah blah I don’t like Alex Jones’ thing!” I shouldn’t have to, because this isn’t actually about Alex Jones, but here it is:

I don’t like Alex Jones. He’s made millions saying the things disgruntled right-wingers want to hear instead of telling the truth; he throws in disinfo with his info, which is the same as lying all the time. He’s made countless false predictions and his sudden sycophantic support for a US president has helped lull the populist right into complacency when they should be holding Trump to his non-interventionist campaign pledges, making him even more worthless than he was prior to 2016.

But this isn’t about defending Alex Jones. He just happens to be the thinnest edge of the wedge.

As of this writing, Infowars has been censored from Facebook, Youtube (which is part of Google), Apple, Spotify, and now even Pinterest, all within hours of each other. This happens to have occurred at the same time Infowars was circulating a petition with tens of thousands of signatures calling on President Trump to pardon WikiLeaks editor-in-chief Julian Assange, who poses a much greater threat to establishment narratives than Alex Jones ever has. Assange’s mother also reports that this mass removal of Infowars’ audience occurred less than 48 hours after she was approached to do an interview by an Infowars producer.

In a corporatist system of government, wherein there is no meaningful separation between corporate power and state power, corporate censorship is state censorship. Because legalized bribery in the form of corporate lobbying and campaign donations has given wealthy Americans the ability to control the US government’s policy and behavior while ordinary Americans have no effective influence whatsoever, the US unquestionably has a corporatist system of government. Large, influential corporations are inseparable from the state, so their use of censorship is inseparable from state censorship.

This is especially true of the vast megacorporations of Silicon Valley, whose extensive ties to US intelligence agencies are well-documented.

continued..https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2018/0...ent-corporate-censorship-is-state-censorship/

Good article but they have things a little wrong, it is not corporate speech that is the problem, it is corporate welfare and competition limiting taxes and regulations that are the problem, Trump is also to blame in a small way along with other high profile influencers, they should have abandoned twitter etc. when the censorship first started, I fault Rand and some of our other public personalities as well.

 

[Origanalist]

So does anyone here use Gab?

Just started a account, no idea if i'm going to post much there yet. https://gab.ai/Origanalist

 

[euphemia]

Alex Jones has been using other people's platforms for a long time. He can always buy his own media.

 

[dannno]

Alex Jones can always buy his own media.

Ya, the most popular platforms on the web don't need anybody promoting peace, what they need is non-stop war mongering and leftist horse tripe.

 

[dannno]

Trump is also to blame in a small way along with other high profile influencers, they should have abandoned twitter etc. when the censorship first started, I fault Rand and some of our other public personalities as well.

They should all be on multiple platforms in order to get the most views, but I agree it would be nice if they were more active and promoted more alternative platforms. The problem is that doesn't get them a lot of views. The point is to reach as many people as possible.

 

[euphemia]

I would not say Jones is all that peaceful. His tone and language are not peaceful at all. If he's worth what he and you all think he's worth, then he should be able to float his own company.

As much as I dislike it, YouTube, Apple, FB, and all the rest are either private entities, or publicly traded. They have BoDs and shareholders. They have to answer to the profit.

If we are libertarian, the that includes the right to run one's business the way one wants to. If that means Alex Jones needs to find another way, then that kind of tests the strength of his market.

 

[Swordsmyth]

They should all be on multiple platforms in order to get the most views, but I agree it would be nice if they were more active and promoted more alternative platforms. The problem is that doesn't get them a lot of views. The point is to reach as many people as possible.

I understand but this kind of censorship should be met with a public backlash, Trump in particular could start a mass exodus to non-censoring sites if he wanted, especially if he coordinated with Rand and others, imagine the effect if his final tweet was that he, Rand and a host of other politicians and celebrities were moving to Gab and other alternatives to MugBook etc.

 

[timosman]

I would not say Jones is all that peaceful. His tone and language are not peaceful at all. If he's worth what he and you all think he's worth, then he should be able to float his own company.

Great mental gymnastics.

 

[Anti Globalist]

Trump better say something about all these people getting banned.

 

[dannno]

I would not say Jones is all that peaceful. His tone and language are not peaceful at all. If he's worth what he and you all think he's worth, then he should be able to float his own company.

Sorry but you are completely wrong, Alex Jones is one of the only people in the media who agrees with Ron Paul's non-interventionist foreign policy.

Just because he talks a certain way does not mean he is a violent person.

He the most popular media personality on all the major platforms who promotes a non-interventionist foreign policy. If you think it is good that he is off of them, then you are basically saying that all anybody on those platforms should have access to is war propaganda.

As much as I dislike it, YouTube, Apple, FB, and all the rest are either private entities, or publicly traded. They have BoDs and shareholders. They have to answer to the profit.

If we are libertarian, the that includes the right to run one's business the way one wants to. If that means Alex Jones needs to find another way, then that kind of tests the strength of his market.

See, you don't get it - Alex Jones made money for all these companies. They profited off of him. The reason they banned him had nothing to do with their personal finances, it had to do with the fact that the military industrial complex controls these corporations.

I'm not saying this because I want the government to control businesses, I'm saying this to warn people that the government already controls these businesses (twitter, fbook, youtube, etc..) and that is dangerous.

 

[timosman]

See, you don't get it - Alex Jones made money for all these companies. They profited off of him. The reason they banned him had nothing to do with their personal finances, it had to do with the fact that the military industrial complex controls these corporations.

Why would you believe such a lunacy?

 

[euphemia]

Sorry but you are completely wrong, Alex Jones is one of the only people in the media who agrees with Ron Paul's non-interventionist foreign policy.

Just because he talks a certain way does not mean he is a violent person.

He the most popular media personality on all the major platforms who promotes a non-interventionist foreign policy. If you think it is good that he is off of them, then you are basically saying that all anybody on those platforms should have access to is war propaganda.




See, you don't get it - Alex Jones made money for all these companies. They profited off of him. The reason they banned him had nothing to do with their personal finances, it had to do with the fact that the military industrial complex controls these corporations.

I'm not saying this because I want the government to control businesses, I'm saying this to warn people that the government already controls these businesses (twitter, fbook, youtube, etc..) and that is dangerous.

I do get it. Maybe you don't. Everything is owned by government as per federal licensing. Of course government is going to push its own agenda. This is why Jones needs his own platform. He's not my cup of tea, but there you go.

 

[dannno]

I do get it. Maybe you don't. Everything is owned by government as per federal licensing. Of course government is going to push its own agenda. This is why Jones needs his own platform. He's not my cup of tea, but there you go.

He has his own website and streaming platform, but people who don't go to infowars website and are on social media can't see his content anymore.

But by your own admission, the government is censoring infowars and this is not a private company issue.

 

[euphemia]

Anything licensed or permitted by government is not free. This is why I am against legalization of pot. It's still government permission, regulation, and taxation. Government is not authorized to control it and should be silent.

It's the same with media. Any kind of platform has to be licensed by the government. I'm not sure why it is so hard for so-called libertarians not to see government-sanctioned media for what it is.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Anything licensed or permitted by government is not free. This is why I am against legalization of pot. It's still government permission, regulation, and taxation. Government is not authorized to control it and should be silent.

It's the same with media. Any kind of platform has to be licensed by the government. I'm not sure why it is so hard for so-called libertarians not to see government-sanctioned media for what it is.

Please show me a link to Twitter and MugBook being licensed by the government, TV and radio are licensed because government controls the airwaves but the internet is not licensed.

 

[euphemia]

The Internet isn't regulated? The domains are not registered? Mark Zuckerberg wasn't called before Congress?

 

[timosman]

Please show me a link to Twitter and MugBook being licensed by the government, TV and radio are licensed because government controls the airwaves but the internet is not licensed.

Nothing like explaining to someone how the internet works on THE INTERNET.

 

[timosman]

The Internet isn't regulated? The domains are not registered?

Domain registration simply means putting an entry in the DNS. Think having your business listed in a directory service if it helps you.

 

[Swordsmyth]

The Internet isn't regulated?

Not much, other than a few laws like the one that took out backpage individual sites are basically unregulated.

The domains are not registered?

With a non-government entity, it is more like having your dog registered with the AKC.

Mark Zuckerberg wasn't called before Congress?

That is irrelevant, he was being interrogated about "election meddling" and whether he was violating laws that required him to not censor people in order to qualify to be exempt from some legal responsibilities.