Social Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg admits Biden administration tried to forcibly censor to truth on social media platforms

Cajun said:
Will review in the morning. But you are saying twitter stuff before is good but twitter under Musk is not. Getting my boys ready for bed but will let you know. All of the prior stuff when it was reversed is good? I'm not ok with silencing anyone just so we are clear. Are you? You didn't answer this.

Biden was under covid so we are clear...
Click to expand...
Define silencing, because I thought I did answer the question. Maybe I misunderstood I'm game for reanswering or clarifying
 
HereticBD said:
It's like the mafia and their totally legal extortion exercises. They just make "requests" like the federal government does. Absolutely nothing bad will happen if you deny those "requests". If the federal government makes "requests" that your private company do their bidding, just tell them to get fucked. What's the worst that will happen?
Click to expand...

But they did deny the requests, and nothing happened.

We have a the SCOTUS standard for what constitutes state action to trigger a 1st Amendment challenge. It requires force, and that's impossible here given that facebook and twitter admitted to doing whatever the fuck they felt like with these requests.

Your outrage is both fake and uneducated.
 
Company: Allows egregious shit (lies, libel, bigotry, violence, misinformation, illegal content, foreign propaganda, election interference) posted on its platform.
Person (private or government official): hey, um, can you remove that illegal, untrue, foreign propaganda, misinformation that has inherently zero value and is quite harmful to individual and society.
Company: Yeah, sure
MAGA: Makes sure the world is perfectly clear that they have zero clue what the First Amendment represents.
 
Their coming for MAGAMETA next.

I been hearing EU is dumping billions and billions getting out of tech bro companies. The best part Chinese companies could be the biggest winners F'g idiots.
"(Bloomberg) -- Europe’s largest pension fund sold its entire €571 million ($585 million) stake in Tesla Inc. in the third quarter "partly due" to disagreement with Elon Musk’s remuneration package."




 
Last edited:
HereticBD said:
They didn't deny "most requests" from the Biden administration. In fact, I believe they accommodated them somewhere in the 90% range. The DOJ also had a backdoor portal to Facebook that allowed them to censor material they deemed "misinformation" at will.
Click to expand...
And the sources for this are?
 
Wilmer Digreux said:
It's called putting pressure on them so they'll be willing to capitulate to what he actually wants....which is not to buy Greenland or Canada or the Panama Canal. You're fucking retarded and have no clue how anything works in the real world because you clearly coasted through college sucking your professors cocks for passing grades. On the ignore list you go you blue haired communist cocksucker


<3>
Click to expand...


lol wow i might've overreacted a little here <lmao>
 
Anung Un Rama said:
Are private companies putting people in jail for speech?
Click to expand...

You don't need to be jailed in order for your first amendment rights to be violated. Like I said, they're using private companies as conduit to skirt around the first amendment. There is nothing I said there that isn't true.

Why are you arguing in favor of the government using private companies to censor American citizens? This should be as universally frowned upon as any subject out there.
 
Anung Un Rama said:
Company: Allows egregious shit (lies, libel, bigotry, violence, misinformation, illegal content, foreign propaganda, election interference) posted on its platform.
Person (private or government official): hey, um, can you remove that illegal, untrue, foreign propaganda, misinformation that has inherently zero value and is quite harmful to individual and society.
Company: Yeah, sure
MAGA: Makes sure the world is perfectly clear that they have zero clue what the First Amendment represents.
Click to expand...
Yup.

Magats are stupid so explaining the First Amendment to them is impossible.

It is like them crying int he 'Twitter Files' garbage. that Biden, out of office, asking Twitter to take down the porn of his son, and to follow their own rule on 'no non consensual nudity posting' was Biden impacting their first amendment.

they ignore at that same point in time Trump was POTUS and in office and having the government send Social Media and News sites to take down material simply because he did not like what was being said.

In this instance Zuck is basically saying 'the gov't was trying to get me to take down, what they considered misinformation'.... ZOMG say it isn't so ... :eek:

That is EXACTLY what the government role should be. And if the company wants to give them the finger they then can.
 
RoastBeast said:
You don't need to be jailed in order for your first amendment rights to be violated. Like I said, they're using private companies as conduit to skirt around the first amendment. There is nothing I said there that isn't true.

Why are you arguing in favor of the government using private companies to censor American citizens? This should be as universally frowned upon as any subject out there.
Click to expand...
the problem is what you said is not true.

You are acting as if the government was in control and just using the SM as a shell or front which is WRONG.

When there is an earthquake or hurricane the gov't will put out advisories and even try to correct misinformation on the news, if they see the wrong thing being said and that harm can come from it.

You can say all you want 'well that is censorship if i want to continue to say the wrong thing or think they are wrong, even if i can keep saying it', but that would be wrong ...and dumb.
 
ChosenOne said:
the problem is what you said is not true.

You are acting as if the government was in control and just using the SM as a shell or front which is WRONG.

When there is an earthquake or hurricane the gov't will put out advisories and even try to correct misinformation on the news, if they see the wrong thing being said and that harm can come from it.

You can say all you want 'well that is censorship if i want to continue to say the wrong thing or think they are wrong, even if i can keep saying it', but that would be wrong ...and dumb.
Click to expand...

I said they are using private companies to skirt the first amendment and censor American citizens. There is nothing I said there that is incorrect and it is weird as hell that you guys would come to their defense on this issue. Pretending as if the government only cares about ensuring the truth is out there is ridiculous when you yourself know that the government lies to us.
 
RoastBeast said:
I said they are using private companies to skirt the first amendment and censor American citizens. There is nothing I said there that is incorrect and it is weird as hell that you guys would come to their defense on this issue. Pretending as if the government only cares about ensuring the truth is out there is ridiculous when you yourself know that the government lies to us.
Click to expand...
Ya but the problem is you are wrong so what you said is incorrect.

I am going to tell you are spreading misinformation right now and i am going to ask you to go in and edit your post to remove it. i say F-U and your free speech.

What you chose to not do it and you have the freedom to make that choice so i am not impacting your free speech just by telling you that? Cool, same when the government gives out its advisories.
 
RoastBeast said:
You don't need to be jailed in order for your first amendment rights to be violated. Like I said, they're using private companies as conduit to skirt around the first amendment. There is nothing I said there that isn't true.

Why are you arguing in favor of the government using private companies to censor American citizens? This should be as universally frowned upon as any subject out there.
Click to expand...
No. So long as the content was not illegal the social media companies in question were free to say yes or no to requests by government and private citizen alike without legal repercussions. And they did say no many times.
They are still there, worth billions, not in court, not paying fines.

With regards to legal content, these companies had standards that they honed that didn't abide racism and hate speech and calls for violence. That seemed pretty reasonable for publicly traded social media companies.

I don't agree with censorship for political reasons, but I have no problem with dishonest politically motivated misinformation being taken down. And fuck hate speech anywhere.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,262,702
Messages
57,180,603
Members
175,569
Latest member
Jean Baptiste NZABA M

Share this page

Back
Top