Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo — Page 761

chyron8472 said:

Mrebo said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Mrebo said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Mrebo said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

Once access to a private platform becomes a requirement for visibility and success, does the platform have an obligation that goes beyond its own financial interests?

I believe so. I actually think the government needs to enforce the 1st Amendment on all of these monopolistic speech platforms. A lot of people are, rightfully so, fearful of the government censoring them, but then turn a blind eye to corporations being their overlord. I want neither. It’s why the presidents of the progressive era, Teddy Roosevelt mainly and Taft to a degree, broke up all those trusts and monopolies that were making life intolerable for most Americans. Wilson even nationalized the railroads. Conservatives struggle a lot with this argument because they simultaneously want to proclaim that they’re somehow victims of censorship when their worldview allows for the corporate overlords to censor them.

Also, to be clear I was talking about the people that want to censor the game or have it removed but they don’t care about gun control.

The government cannot and should not enforce the 1st Amendment on private parties. That itself would be a violation of the 1st Amendment. It would be no different than forcing book publishers to print books they’re opposed to. The publishers themselves have a freedom of expression that encompasses the works they publish and choose not to publish.

I agree with your book publisher example, but imagine if there was only one book publisher with any kind of audience. That’s essentially what Youtube is, or Facebook. And book publishing is totally different. That actually requires printing copies and advertising. Youtube and Facebook and Twitter are just platforms.

Imagine if there were only one book publisher. The best thing is to go start your own publishing company. Not force that company to print what you want them to. And what do you mean by “just platforms”?

Obviously no one can start a competing Youtube at this point. Any such attempt would be delusional. I mean they’re just platforms because they’re in no way obligated to do anything other than be a platform for the videos or the speech. They’re not responsible for advertising a video or producing or printing anything like a publisher would be.

It’s certainly possible to start a competitor to YouTube. The idea that it’s YouTube only and forever is delusional.

Because blip.tv (which is now defunct) was so popular compared to Youtube. Or like Google+ is so popular compared to Facebook.

Ridiculous. You’re completely ignoring the effect market share can have on the success of a competing product or service. It’s like saying someone should build their own app store if they don’t like Google Play or Apple’s App Store. As though new customers would just come out of the woodwork when they’ve already invested so much in the other service.

To acknowledge that Steam or Youtube have basically cornered the market on their respective services is not delusional. There are competitors to Steam. But Steam is still by far the biggest dog in the yard, and for good reason. No one is saying “only and forever”, but to assume they don’t have near-monopolistic influences on their markets is rather foolish.

Good thing I didn’t argue that and actually said just the opposite several times early in this discussion. The question is what to do about it.

I say alternative outlets are feasible and laws, and least the kind mfm proposes, would do great harm. Dom cites an alternative video site that he says is pretty popular. Can it grow further? Wook’s observation indicates they are working on growth.

I’d like to see YouTube and other near-monopolistic sites change their ways. I’d like more competition.

You didn’t cite MySpace which was extremely popular. Competition drove them out. I do worry that the internet is congealing, making competition harder and empowering those who want to control social discourse. The question still is what to do.

SilverWook said:

Interesting! I never get political ads, at least not this year.

Yeah, it was tons of crap about PragerU and other stuff. I bet it’s because I watch a lot of political videos.

http://money.cnn.com/2018/05/31/media/samantha-bee-apologizes-ivanka-trump/index.html

Samantha Bee calls Ivanka Trump a feckless cunt in response to the for some reason viral photo of Ivanka with her toddler. I don’t get the controversy over this particular photo or the controversy over this line. I do know that Bee shouldn’t have apologized. The people mad at her for saying it won’t forgive her and her supporters will just perceive it as weakness.

moviefreakedmind said:

SilverWook said:

Interesting! I never get political ads, at least not this year.

Yeah, it was tons of crap about PragerU and other stuff. I bet it’s because I watch a lot of political videos.

That stuff will rot your brain.

Collipso said:

trump is an idiot. the protectionist tariffs on steel and aluminum are a terrible idea. trade war incoming

Begun the trade wars have.

moviefreakedmind said:

http://money.cnn.com/2018/05/31/media/samantha-bee-apologizes-ivanka-trump/index.html

Samantha Bee calls Ivanka Trump a feckless cunt in response to the for some reason viral photo of Ivanka with her toddler. I don’t get the controversy over this particular photo or the controversy over this line. I do know that Bee shouldn’t have apologized. The people mad at her for saying it won’t forgive her and her supporters will just perceive it as weakness.

They should cancel her show!

I’m actually surprised every time I hear she still has a show.

Mrebo said:

moviefreakedmind said:

http://money.cnn.com/2018/05/31/media/samantha-bee-apologizes-ivanka-trump/index.html

Samantha Bee calls Ivanka Trump a feckless cunt in response to the for some reason viral photo of Ivanka with her toddler. I don’t get the controversy over this particular photo or the controversy over this line. I do know that Bee shouldn’t have apologized. The people mad at her for saying it won’t forgive her and her supporters will just perceive it as weakness.

They should cancel her show!

I’m actually surprised every time I hear she still has a show.

She probably won’t, but they may put her on hold for a while. Again, don’t cancel the fucking show. This, unlike Roseanne, is a comment that isn’t broadly offensive but is rather just an insult to a political figure. Canceling everything over “offensive” language is a slippery slope.

moviefreakedmind said:

Mrebo said:

moviefreakedmind said:

http://money.cnn.com/2018/05/31/media/samantha-bee-apologizes-ivanka-trump/index.html

Samantha Bee calls Ivanka Trump a feckless cunt in response to the for some reason viral photo of Ivanka with her toddler. I don’t get the controversy over this particular photo or the controversy over this line. I do know that Bee shouldn’t have apologized. The people mad at her for saying it won’t forgive her and her supporters will just perceive it as weakness.

They should cancel her show!

I’m actually surprised every time I hear she still has a show.

She probably won’t, but they may put her on hold for a while. Again, don’t cancel the fucking show. This, unlike Roseanne, is a comment that isn’t broadly offensive but is rather just an insult to a political figure. Canceling everything over “offensive” language is a slippery slope.

Yep.

But I mean Roseanne’s show was annoying at best. Her comparing someone to an animal was poor taste at best.

But comedians have been doing that for ages (Trump as an orangutan for example) so cancelling a whole show because of the tweet of 1 cast member is sort of stupid in its own way.

Producers should’ve just got her to make an episode where she was compared to a hippo and had her work through her feelings on it.

I don’t know. I guess I’m just thinking being oversensitive sort of short-changes the chances to actually fix problems instead of just muffling them up.

Or something

People will forget this fast. Give it two weeks and Roseanne reruns will be back on the air. I also suspect they’ll just bring the show back without her. If they can continue House of Cards when their star is accused of and basically admitted to felony sex acts against underage victims, they can do it with Roseanne.

Jay said:

Trident said:

I don’t know. I guess I’m just thinking being oversensitive sort of short-changes the chances to actually fix problems instead of just muffling them up.

Nobody is allowed to be remorseful anymore. Whatever you’ve done, and to whatever degree, can only be rectified by your career ending and you going away forever. And if you do apologize, you’ll only be ripped into more fiercely.

That’s why I said it was a big mistake for Samantha Bee to apologize.

I think maybe they were making an example of her. Like, people in the future might think twice before making racially-charged (or other such) statements at the risk of getting dozens of people fired from the project they’re involved in. Because apparently the fact that her show was doing well didn’t matter, and if they all lost their jobs, it’s on Roseanne not the producers.

Just saw a clip of Candace Owens on Joe Rogan. He started to press her on the issue of climate change and my god is she a fraud.

chyron8472 said:

I think maybe they were making an example of her. Like, people in the future might think twice before making racially-charged (or other such) statements at the risk of getting dozens of people fired from the project they’re involved in. Because apparently the fact that her show was doing well didn’t matter, and if they all lost their jobs, it’s on Roseanne not the producers.

They’ll probably keep the show going without her. Sara Gilbert is the one that got the revival going and she’s very influential in the TV world. There was no reason to shut down the show over one cast member’s mental breakdown.

darthrush said:

Just saw a clip of Candace Owens on Joe Rogan. He started to press her on the issue of climate change and my god is she a fraud.

Yep, she’s always been a professional victim that sells out her political opinions to the highest bidder. She used to be anti-Trump and then found an audience in the pro-Trump crowd.

Free speech in schools. Judge says kid can wear border wall tshirt.

Yeah, you can, and should, be able to wear anything you want to school.