Alex Jones shutdown on YouTube, Facebook, and Apple

Post Reply New Topic

While I think Alex Jones is a crazier than a shithouse rat, I have always been a staunch supporter of the First Amendment. The action taken again Jones should be an affront to everyone who understands why protecting all opinions and voices needs to be diligently protected. And yes, folks, both the Left and Right are equally guilty of attempting to shut down the speech of their opposition.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/06/tech ... otify.html

NOTE: Free Speech is Free Speech.

But the rights to free speech and free press mean ONLY that the government can't arrest someone for what they say or post. It doesn't mean that anyone else has to listen to or read to their bushlit, or host them while they share it.

The First Amendment doesn't shield someone from disagreements, criticism or consequences, either.

If "someone's" posts get flagged and then deleted, or if "someone" gets permanently banned from a website, their civil rights aren't being violated.

It's just that people reading those posts think that "someone" is a complete and utterly despicable troll, and they're showing that "someone" the way out.

Technically, you're correct. Private companies who provide online content have the right to manage their websites in any fashion they choose. But Mark Zuckerberg didn't just wake up one day and decide to boot Alex from FB, nor did whomever runs Apple and YouTube. Obviously, political pressure is being yielded. That's the issue here.

Good for them. I would do the same thing. He can go find someone else to host his content. I'm sure there are plenty of companies who would be happy to work with him. After all, a lot of businesses care more about money than ethics, and Jones has a huge following and generates lots of money.

He'd better not show up here.

Sometimes I feel like I'm banging my head against a wall trying to get across a very simple point that should be obvious to anyone who understands that the First Amendment is in place to protect all speech; not just speech with which we agree or has mass acceptance.

Like I said, it's not so much an issue of "Free Speech" as it is an issue of getting rid of the unwanted jackasses and trolls who spread their lies and filth solely for the sake of gaining attention and stirring up trouble.

I find the mainstream media the worst offenders when it comes to spreading lies and filth. Rachael Maddow and Sean Hannity are two great examples; the former being a liberal ideologue, the latter a conservative. But both have the approval of the oligarchs. If Maddow woke up one day and decided to start thinking for herself, and telling the truth, she'd lose her cushy job at MSNBC where she makes about $30,000 a day.

You forgot to mention the Tavr'chedl and the Gnomes of Zurich.

Funny! So what is your opinion of the mainstream media? Do you honestly believe that they represent true journalism?

When I think about it, the MMS media is perpetuating a lot of stuff that is equally nuts. For instance, Bernie Sanders supporters are Russian agents! Holy s**t! The Russia narrative is so monumentally absurd, but people have been so dumbed down in the U.S., they're eating it up like candy!

Absolutely. They are the full embodiment of true journalism.

What they are not, however, is a bastion of reporting.

With reporting, it's all about the facts -- who, what, when, where, why, and how. Within just a few short paragraphs, you can identify the victim, the perpetrator, the method, the motive, and what opportunity presented itself for the crime to be committed. You can also know the time and place of the crime, as well as any collateral damage. Heck, if you dig deep enough, you might even uncover the name of the reporter.

With journalism, every aspect of an event simply must be covered, from the salient facts to the emotional reaction of the victim's sister's hairdresser's niece's cousin's neighbor. Blood-stained clothing, burnt-out cars, and shattered store windows are their stock in trade. Screaming mobs, ignorant politicians, and vapid celebrities are their bread, milk, and meat. It's all about emotional content, and how much monetary value their marketing departments can put on 30 seconds of air time -- the more emotional content, the larger the readership; the larger the readership, the more valuable the air time; the more valuable the air time, the more that can be charged to the sponsors; the more that can be charged to the sponsors, the greater the likelihood that the "journalist" will win some kind of award or other recognition.

This is why the journalistic media has taken over from plain, old-fashioned reporting -- there's money to be made in distorting, exaggerating, fabricating, and sensationalizing a story, which is also why Alex Jones is the prime example of a true American journalist.

My thoughts on the first amendment.

What's guaranteed: You cannot be arrested and government cannot silence or censor you for what you say. No public or private entity can have you arrested either.

What's debatable: If a public or private entity outside the government decides to silence or censor you for what you say, you're on your own. You're in charge of defending your own speech against censorship and criticism. The idea whether or not the government has to come to the defense of everyone's freedom of speech every time they are silenced on a media platform by a private entity.

I pretty much agree with most of that. Perhaps the term I should have used was "investigative reporting." The very people who are charged with holding elected officials accountable have become a sad representation of what their profession used to be about. That's because it's all about the money, now, and those who are in control have a vested interest in sticking to a certain script. I remember a few months ago, I can't remember who it was, someone brought an excellent point of when the demise of investigative began. He surmised that it began with '60-Minutes' back in the early 70s -- or late 60's -- whenever that show began. It suddenly became a top-rated program. Before that, news had never made money for the networks. But once the big wigs at the network realized there was money to be made with new, it changed reporting forever. It became just another form of entertainment, and heavily controlled by corporate interests.

Last edited by VegetableMan on 07 Aug 2018, 2:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

So then you agree that the only reason that Alex Jones is the prime example of a true American journalist is because he is adept at distorting, exaggerating, fabricating, and sensationalizing a story.

Cool!

I'm glad we finally agree on something!



Now, don't go back and edit your reply ...

I did just that because I accidentally punched it through before typing anything. See my comment above.


Furthermore, I'd like to add that we have to support the worst of the alternative media if are to support the good ones out there that are making a lot of sense, while constantly being demonized and shut down.