Big Tech Assault on Free Speech
-
LOL. What a fucking dweeb.
This is equivalent to being trolled and insulted on here, then suing TBB.
LOL. What a fucking dweeb.
This is equivalent to being trolled and insulted on here, then suing TBB.
Tiam, that is not equivalent at all. It is more like here, they would delete/not show conservative opinions, but they would show
lefties' opinions without fail. Except, it's a private board, so that isn't even true.
As a public? forum? An entire political movement, nationally, is being fostered, deliberately, by biased constructed algorithms to favor one side of the politics, the left side. This is nationally dangerous - a national publicly used medium is being slanted to control the next presidential election, having lost the last presidential election. Any attack on any conservative, anywhere, is an accepted attack, and any defense is not accepted.
Total controlling bias, on the encouragements by prominent leftwing politicians all the way up to former "president" ObaMao
Nothing to do with anything that goes on on the Brownsboard.
-
LOL. What a fucking dweeb.
This is equivalent to being trolled and insulted on here, then suing TBB.
Tiam, that is not equivalent at all. It is more like here, they would delete/not show conservative opinions, but they would show
lefties' opinions without fail. Except, it's a private board, so that isn't even true.
As a public? forum? An entire political movement, nationally, is being fostered, deliberately, by biased constructed algorithms to favor one side of the politics, the left side. This is nationally dangerous - a national publicly used medium is being slanted to control the next presidential election, having lost the last presidential election. Any attack on any conservative, anywhere, is an accepted attack, and any defense is not accepted.
Total controlling bias, on the encouragements by prominent leftwing politicians all the way up to former "president" ObaMao
Nothing to do with anything that goes on on the Brownsboard.
Tiam, that is not equivalent at all. It is more like here, they would delete/not show conservative opinions, but they would show
lefties' opinions without fail. Except, it's a private board, so that isn't even true.
As a public? forum? An entire political movement, nationally, is being fostered, deliberately, by biased constructed algorithms to favor one side of the politics, the left side. This is nationally dangerous - a national publicly used medium is being slanted to control the next presidential election, having lost the last presidential election. Any attack on any conservative, anywhere, is an accepted attack, and any defense is not accepted.
Total controlling bias, on the encouragements by prominent leftwing politicians all the way up to former "president" ObaMao
Nothing to do with anything that goes on on the Brownsboard.
While this board is privately owned, it is publicly accessible to all with limitations on what content may be posted per the owner/mods.
Twitter is no different. Again, I don't necessarily agree with it. Zuckerberg might say he wants facebook to "look" more neutral, but I'm well aware of what I see when I read between the lines on comments like that - as are you.
-
Tiam, that is not equivalent at all. It is more like here, they would delete/not show conservative opinions, but they would show
lefties' opinions without fail. Except, it's a private board, so that isn't even true.
As a public? forum? An entire political movement, nationally, is being fostered, deliberately, by biased constructed algorithms to favor one side of the politics, the left side. This is nationally dangerous - a national publicly used medium is being slanted to control the next presidential election, having lost the last presidential election. Any attack on any conservative, anywhere, is an accepted attack, and any defense is not accepted.
Total controlling bias, on the encouragements by prominent leftwing politicians all the way up to former "president" ObaMao
Nothing to do with anything that goes on on the Brownsboard.
While this board is privately owned, it is publicly accessible to all with limitations on what content may be posted per the owner/mods.
Twitter is no different. Again, I don't necessarily agree with it. Zuckerberg might say he wants facebook to "look" more neutral, but I'm well aware of what I see when I read between the lines on comments like that - as are you.
While this board is privately owned, it is publicly accessible to all with limitations on what content may be posted per the owner/mods.
Twitter is no different. Again, I don't necessarily agree with it. Zuckerberg might say he wants facebook to "look" more neutral, but I'm well aware of what I see when I read between the lines on comments like that - as are you.
Sure, but the Brownsboard is privately owned, and not a public entity. Generally speaking - it is a forum for an exclusive group - Browns fans...for the most part, granted.
But twitter is a national public entity - privately owned or not. At least unofficially, across the board. The difference is, twitter is a privately-owned social forum on a grand national/international? scale. It is used by government officials, to express information/opinions on a national scale. I'm probably not explaining it correctly, I "ain't no lawyer"
Fox example:
https://blogs.findlaw.com/technologist/2017/08/is-twitter-a-public-forum.html
But, nevertheless, the very nature of governmental use of social media lends itself to being the most public of public forums. When government officials use social media channels to make official communications, there is a developing line of cases that establish these channels as limited public forums. Essentially when a government entity or official creates a social media channel for official communications, it converts the channel from a private forum, to a limited public forum, which entails not-so-limited First Amendment protections for those who participate in the forum.
I should explain, that we don't twit, face, or link. Well, I used to link back in the pro working days, but no more.
-
While this board is privately owned, it is publicly accessible to all with limitations on what content may be posted per the owner/mods.
Twitter is no different. Again, I don't necessarily agree with it. Zuckerberg might say he wants facebook to "look" more neutral, but I'm well aware of what I see when I read between the lines on comments like that - as are you.
Sure, but the Brownsboard is privately owned, and not a public entity. Generally speaking - it is a forum for an exclusive group - Browns fans...for the most part, granted.
But twitter is a national public entity - privately owned or not. At least unofficially, across the board. The difference is, twitter is a privately-owned social forum on a grand national/international? scale. It is used by government officials, to express information/opinions on a national scale. I'm probably not explaining it correctly, I "ain't no lawyer"
Fox example:
https://blogs.findlaw.com/technologist/2017/08/is-twitter-a-public-forum.html
But, nevertheless, the very nature of governmental use of social media lends itself to being the most public of public forums. When government officials use social media channels to make official communications, there is a developing line of cases that establish these channels as limited public forums. Essentially when a government entity or official creates a social media channel for official communications, it converts the channel from a private forum, to a limited public forum, which entails not-so-limited First Amendment protections for those who participate in the forum.
I should explain, that we don't twit, face, or link. Well, I used to link back in the pro working days, but no more.
Sure, but the Brownsboard is privately owned, and not a public entity. Generally speaking - it is a forum for an exclusive group - Browns fans...for the most part, granted.
But twitter is a national public entity - privately owned or not. At least unofficially, across the board. The difference is, twitter is a privately-owned social forum on a grand national/international? scale. It is used by government officials, to express information/opinions on a national scale. I'm probably not explaining it correctly, I "ain't no lawyer"
Fox example:
https://blogs.findlaw.com/technologist/2017/08/is-twitter-a-public-forum.html
But, nevertheless, the very nature of governmental use of social media lends itself to being the most public of public forums. When government officials use social media channels to make official communications, there is a developing line of cases that establish these channels as limited public forums. Essentially when a government entity or official creates a social media channel for official communications, it converts the channel from a private forum, to a limited public forum, which entails not-so-limited First Amendment protections for those who participate in the forum.
I should explain, that we don't twit, face, or link. Well, I used to link back in the pro working days, but no more.
This harkens back to the "are they too big of a company" argument. Sure, they offer a social platform open to all - but again, you're bound by their ToS.
I just consider it a dangerous precedent to declare a private companies labor as a public utility when it isn't what any would call a necessity.
-
I get your point - I say this - with freedom comes responsbility - when a social media, my opinion, gets national and virtually used by most? people in all states, something like that - the media's ability to deliberately undermine a legit election via extreme bias, under handed reporting, deliberate political hacking, etc...
then the effect is national and public. It's a problem regardless of political persuasion. I'm hard pressed to name even one example on the conservative side.
Having said that, if I were a judge to rule in court based on all sides' evidence, I'd shake my head, rub my forehead and ask "why me?"
-
I am uncomfortable anytime we are talking about getting the government involved to regulate what is in essence a luxury. My grandpa avoids social media like it is dick cancer. He must be missing out on this necessity.
-
I never obsessed about dick cancer, just sayin............
-
I never obsessed about dick cancer, just sayin............
I never obsessed about dick cancer, just sayin............
RIP DHBF
-
Sure it is but who remembers the fairness Doctrine and its supporters?
WSS
That whole thing is silly.
That whole thing is silly.
I would tend to agree with you but oh, and there's that damn but again, in the real world that we all have to live in, the information that the tiny fraction of people want to find, is usually found through the internet giants like Google or worse yet Snapchat, Facebook Etc. At some point people should become concerned that the dissemination of news is filtered through the jaundiced eye of the left. Look how our members on the left constantly bitching about fox . Imagine if 95% of the media was as right-leaning has Fox News . I think there would be some wailing and gnashing of teeth? Beyond that I don't know exactly what could or should be done about it but that's a fact.
WSS
www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons -
That whole thing is silly.
I would tend to agree with you but oh, and there's that damn but again, in the real world that we all have to live in, the information that the tiny fraction of people want to find, is usually found through the internet giants like Google or worse yet Snapchat, Facebook Etc. At some point people should become concerned that the dissemination of news is filtered through the jaundiced eye of the left. Look how our members on the left constantly bitching about fox . Imagine if 95% of the media was as right-leaning has Fox News . I think there would be some wailing and gnashing of teeth? Beyond that I don't know exactly what could or should be done about it but that's a fact.
WSS
I would tend to agree with you but oh, and there's that damn but again, in the real world that we all have to live in, the information that the tiny fraction of people want to find, is usually found through the internet giants like Google or worse yet Snapchat, Facebook Etc. At some point people should become concerned that the dissemination of news is filtered through the jaundiced eye of the left. Look how our members on the left constantly bitching about fox . Imagine if 95% of the media was as right-leaning has Fox News . I think there would be some wailing and gnashing of teeth? Beyond that I don't know exactly what could or should be done about it but that's a fact.
WSS
If people are too lazy/dumb to fish a bit deeper for information, no amount of regulating is going to help that. There are still idiots who don’t understand what satire is and lose their minds over The Onion.
-
I would tend to agree with you but oh, and there's that damn but again, in the real world that we all have to live in, the information that the tiny fraction of people want to find, is usually found through the internet giants like Google or worse yet Snapchat, Facebook Etc. At some point people should become concerned that the dissemination of news is filtered through the jaundiced eye of the left. Look how our members on the left constantly bitching about fox . Imagine if 95% of the media was as right-leaning has Fox News . I think there would be some wailing and gnashing of teeth? Beyond that I don't know exactly what could or should be done about it but that's a fact.
WSS
If people are too lazy/dumb to fish a bit deeper for information, no amount of regulating is going to help that. There are still idiots who don’t understand what satire is and lose their minds over The Onion.
If people are too lazy/dumb to fish a bit deeper for information, no amount of regulating is going to help that. There are still idiots who don’t understand what satire is and lose their minds over The Onion.
Of course you are right and that's why I said I didn't know what the hell to do about it. Probably doesn't really matter when you get right down to it.
WSS
-
I would tend to agree with you but oh, and there's that damn but again, in the real world that we all have to live in, the information that the tiny fraction of people want to find, is usually found through the internet giants like Google or worse yet Snapchat, Facebook Etc. At some point people should become concerned that the dissemination of news is filtered through the jaundiced eye of the left. Look how our members on the left constantly bitching about fox . Imagine if 95% of the media was as right-leaning has Fox News . I think there would be some wailing and gnashing of teeth? Beyond that I don't know exactly what could or should be done about it but that's a fact.
WSS
If people are too lazy/dumb to fish a bit deeper for information, no amount of regulating is going to help that. There are still idiots who don’t understand what satire is and lose their minds over The Onion.
If people are too lazy/dumb to fish a bit deeper for information, no amount of regulating is going to help that. There are still idiots who don’t understand what satire is and lose their minds over The Onion.
"The best case against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter" - Churchill
Probably not much has changed since Churchill said that decades ago even though we live in an information society today that they didn't have then. You can say people should be smarter and dig deeper etc but will the masses do it? Probably not even though they really shouldn't have to as Big Tech should have a level playing field. Will this bias against conservatives affect elections? That is one of the big questions I have.
Google has at least nine shadow blacklists that affect what the public sees using it's search engine. When Google is not manipulating the internet to prevent users from seeing right wing content it also is directly attacking the content. Google's fact checking service almost exclusively only fact checks conservative news and in many cases their fact checking is wrong. Recently it was discovered a Google serach of Nazism listed the Northern California Republican party. One republican politician was surprised to see the top search result of her name showed a photo of her labeling her a bigot.
Google is clearly manipulating and controlling the political narrative in favor of Democrats and the left, and silencing conservatives and Republicans.
I don't think there is much denial on that point but the division is what to do about it. I think they are monopolies that will not self regulate themselves and at the minimum need a watchdog group set up over them with ombudsman to handle issues and complaints from consumers.
-
That whole thing is silly.
I would tend to agree with you but oh, and there's that damn but again, in the real world that we all have to live in, the information that the tiny fraction of people want to find, is usually found through the internet giants like Google or worse yet Snapchat, Facebook Etc. At some point people should become concerned that the dissemination of news is filtered through the jaundiced eye of the left. Look how our members on the left constantly bitching about fox . Imagine if 95% of the media was as right-leaning has Fox News . I think there would be some wailing and gnashing of teeth? Beyond that I don't know exactly what could or should be done about it but that's a fact.
WSS
I would tend to agree with you but oh, and there's that damn but again, in the real world that we all have to live in, the information that the tiny fraction of people want to find, is usually found through the internet giants like Google or worse yet Snapchat, Facebook Etc. At some point people should become concerned that the dissemination of news is filtered through the jaundiced eye of the left. Look how our members on the left constantly bitching about fox . Imagine if 95% of the media was as right-leaning has Fox News . I think there would be some wailing and gnashing of teeth? Beyond that I don't know exactly what could or should be done about it but that's a fact.
WSS
If that were true America would be a better place. Democrats would be out of business. Yes, the dissemination of the news is filtered, covered up by the left, but truth can be found.
The question is would there exist "wailing teeth gnashers" if for example every American was informed of all the players in the Russian hoax, their roles, sequence of events, what was said and done, how FAISAs were illegally obtained etc?…. as these things would be reported by a 95% "right leaning" aka reputable news media.
-
I would tend to agree with you but oh, and there's that damn but again, in the real world that we all have to live in, the information that the tiny fraction of people want to find, is usually found through the internet giants like Google or worse yet Snapchat, Facebook Etc. At some point people should become concerned that the dissemination of news is filtered through the jaundiced eye of the left. Look how our members on the left constantly bitching about fox . Imagine if 95% of the media was as right-leaning has Fox News . I think there would be some wailing and gnashing of teeth? Beyond that I don't know exactly what could or should be done about it but that's a fact.
WSS
If people are too lazy/dumb to fish a bit deeper for information, no amount of regulating is going to help that. There are still idiots who don’t understand what satire is and lose their minds over The Onion.
If people are too lazy/dumb to fish a bit deeper for information, no amount of regulating is going to help that. There are still idiots who don’t understand what satire is and lose their minds over The Onion.
Oh we understand what satire is.
If anyone doesn't understand what satire is it's the left. They eat that shit up as if it were news and the comedians who propagate it are all liberals.
What political satire does for them is support or fortify their existing hate or misguided beliefs.
-
If people are too lazy/dumb to fish a bit deeper for information, no amount of regulating is going to help that. There are still idiots who don’t understand what satire is and lose their minds over The Onion.
Oh we understand what satire is.
If anyone doesn't understand what satire is it's the left. They eat that shit up as if it were news and the comedians who propagate it are all liberals.
What political satire does for them is support or fortify their existing hate or misguided beliefs.
Oh we understand what satire is.
If anyone doesn't understand what satire is it's the left. They eat that shit up as if it were news and the comedians who propagate it are all liberals.
What political satire does for them is support or fortify their existing hate or misguided beliefs.
You want to take a guess on who has posted more satirical articles on this board as facts over the years? Our conservative posters or the "left"?
You've been here for years so you know the answer.
Ja.brill Peppers - Cleveland Brown OldBrownsFan, on 02 Jun 2017 - 5:09PM said: "No you are not the work of the devil but you are deceived by the devil." Who's got it better than us? Nooooobody! -
If people are too lazy/dumb to fish a bit deeper for information, no amount of regulating is going to help that. There are still idiots who don’t understand what satire is and lose their minds over The Onion.
"The best case against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter" - Churchill
Probably not much has changed since Churchill said that decades ago even though we live in an information society today that they didn't have then. You can say people should be smarter and dig deeper etc but will the masses do it? Probably not even though they really shouldn't have to as Big Tech should have a level playing field. Will this bias against conservatives affect elections? That is one of the big questions I have.
Google has at least nine shadow blacklists that affect what the public sees using it's search engine. When Google is not manipulating the internet to prevent users from seeing right wing content it also is directly attacking the content. Google's fact checking service almost exclusively only fact checks conservative news and in many cases their fact checking is wrong. Recently it was discovered a Google serach of Nazism listed the Northern California Republican party. One republican politician was surprised to see the top search result of her name showed a photo of her labeling her a bigot.
Google is clearly manipulating and controlling the political narrative in favor of Democrats and the left, and silencing conservatives and Republicans.
I don't think there is much denial on that point but the division is what to do about it. I think they are monopolies that will not self regulate themselves and at the minimum need a watchdog group set up over them with ombudsman to handle issues and complaints from consumers.
" Google's fact checking service almost exclusively only fact checks conservative news and in many cases their fact checking is wrong. Recently it was discovered a Google serach of Nazism listed the Northern California Republican party.
Going to stop you right there. That's Wikipedia and literally anyone can log into and edit a page. Where-area's their moderators catch it and revert the change - as they correctly did.
-
" Google's fact checking service almost exclusively only fact checks conservative news and in many cases their fact checking is wrong. Recently it was discovered a Google serach of Nazism listed the Northern California Republican party.
Going to stop you right there. That's Wikipedia and literally anyone can log into and edit a page. Where-area's their moderators catch it and revert the change - as they correctly did.
Going to stop you right there. That's Wikipedia and literally anyone can log into and edit a page. Where-area's their moderators catch it and revert the change - as they correctly did.
Google did claim it happened because of Wikipedia and I have no reason to doubt that. But it did happen. If Wikipedia is unreliable maybe Google shouldn't use them? I don't know just asking.
-
Going to stop you right there. That's Wikipedia and literally anyone can log into and edit a page. Where-area's their moderators catch it and revert the change - as they correctly did.
Google did claim it happened because of Wikipedia and I have no reason to doubt that. But it did happen. If Wikipedia is unreliable maybe Google shouldn't use them? I don't know just asking.
Google did claim it happened because of Wikipedia and I have no reason to doubt that. But it did happen. If Wikipedia is unreliable maybe Google shouldn't use them? I don't know just asking.
Google doesn't "use them". Google is a search engine that simply provides results. Wiki is entirely community governed. Funny enough, I was apart of a forum from long ago that had a visitor attempt to write himself into Buckeye football history books with simple edits on wiki game entries from the 70's. It ended up being a pretty funny ordeal that actually received attention from a couple national outlets like Yahoo.
-
Google did claim it happened because of Wikipedia and I have no reason to doubt that. But it did happen. If Wikipedia is unreliable maybe Google shouldn't use them? I don't know just asking.
Google doesn't "use them". Google is a search engine that simply provides results. Wiki is entirely community governed. Funny enough, I was apart of a forum from long ago that had a visitor attempt to write himself into Buckeye football history books with simple edits on wiki game entries from the 70's. It ended up being a pretty funny ordeal that actually received attention from a couple national outlets like Yahoo.
Google doesn't "use them". Google is a search engine that simply provides results. Wiki is entirely community governed. Funny enough, I was apart of a forum from long ago that had a visitor attempt to write himself into Buckeye football history books with simple edits on wiki game entries from the 70's. It ended up being a pretty funny ordeal that actually received attention from a couple national outlets like Yahoo.
Reminds me of something some Oklahoma fans did after beating Ohio State..you would ask Siri who owns Ohio State Stadium and Siri would say according to Wikipedia Baker Mayfield owns Ohio State stadium...I didn't see the humor in it at the time but now Mayfield is a Cleveland Brown I have to admit it was pretty clever...
-
Google doesn't "use them". Google is a search engine that simply provides results. Wiki is entirely community governed. Funny enough, I was apart of a forum from long ago that had a visitor attempt to write himself into Buckeye football history books with simple edits on wiki game entries from the 70's. It ended up being a pretty funny ordeal that actually received attention from a couple national outlets like Yahoo.
Reminds me of something some Oklahoma fans did after beating Ohio State..you would ask Siri who owns Ohio State Stadium and Siri would say according to Wikipedia Baker Mayfield owns Ohio State stadium...I didn't see the humor in it at the time but now Mayfield is a Cleveland Brown I have to admit it was pretty clever...
Reminds me of something some Oklahoma fans did after beating Ohio State..you would ask Siri who owns Ohio State Stadium and Siri would say according to Wikipedia Baker Mayfield owns Ohio State stadium...I didn't see the humor in it at the time but now Mayfield is a Clevelend Brown I have to admit it was pretty clever...
Some true zealot like Buckeyes do the same to the *ichigan page after we beat them in The Game. All in good fun for the most part. But the guy I'm referencing was.... a bit of a scam artist. One that tried to use the power of public editing and it backfired on him quite hard. Similar situation here. The IP's that edit changes in Wiki which are changed back can be perma banned.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login