Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

text.npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 889 posts

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#61

Post by seibelj »

p1necone wrote: post #23
echelon wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plenty of people on Reddit and TikTok are getting banned on Parler for posting liberal ideas [1]. It's not free speech . It's one-sided. [1] https://www.newsweek.com/parler-ted-cruz-approved-free-speec... Edit: this post is getting downvoted like crazy. People have strong opinions about this.

"free speech" is just being used as a dog whistle for far right ideas in this case. These people are not behaving in good faith, don't bother engaging with them as if they were.

That's the point of "free speech" - I don't care how far right / left / in outer space your ideas are. You can say them, and I won't absorb the message if I don't care. It's the old saying about TV - if you don't like what's on, just change the channel.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#62

Post by rrrazdan »

itsangaris wrote: post #55
freddie_mercury wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Robert Mercer has nothing to go with Parler. Why are you bringing him up?

Did you read the article? Robert Mercer funded Parler.

Ohh wow! Did you actually read the article?

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#63

Post by itsananderson »

tcbawo wrote: post #14
echelon wrote: post #4

How long until America starts putting limits on free speech? IANAL, but we already have laws against libel, slander, and defamation. Section 230 / communications decency could be modified. New laws could be created to prevent amplified spread of factually incorrect information. Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom to broadcast that speech. I'm not advocating for this, but I see it as a possibility.

There are limits to free speech which have been long established. The clear and present danger doctrine describes limits to free speech, in that you can't yell 'fire' in a crowded theater. When/if the amplification possible with social media is connected with mob violence, there could be prosecution. I don't think court systems and law enforcement are sophisticated enough yet, though.

You may find the "Make No Law" first amendment podcast interesting. It's created by Popehat (Ken White), a well known first amendment lawyer. In his podcast he talks about the history of "fire in a crowded theatre", along with many other first amendment topics. It provides a really interesting view into how the courts have applied the first amendment over the years.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#64

Post by nostromo »

joshuamorton wrote: post #40
rayiner wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Donald Trump attacked illegal immigration specifically: https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2016/aug/08/tim-kaine/... Also, he attacked accepting refugees from certain high-risk countries (which had been designated as such by the Obama administration). He didn’t say “immigrants bad.” > Kaine has embellished the controversy by saying Trump has said "all Mexicans are rapists." The Democrat doesn’t come close to provi…

> Also, it’s not like Clinton didn’t spend four years “disputing ... democracy.” See: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clinton-trum ... I don't believe Clinton ever attacked the integrity of the election process itself. She did claim (and as far as I'm aware the investigations more or less supported the claims) that the Trump campaign colluded with foreign governments to influence the election.

“Joe Biden should not concede under any circumstances, because I think this is going to drag out” - Hillary Clinton

Seems like Trump has taken her advice.

At this point she really should just retire from politics and spend her hundreds of millions of dollars living the good life. She doesn’t do Democrats any favors.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#65

Post by briantakita »

freddie_mercury wrote: post #60
itsangaris wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read the article? Robert Mercer funded Parler.

No he didn't. This is what the article says, "On Saturday, CEO and co-founder John Matze said one of the privately-owned company's early investors is Rebekah Mercer" What's more, I've also read the Wall Street Journal article on the subject which made it even clearer. "Ms. Mercer, in a post on Parler after a version of this article was published, said that her father had no involvement or ownership of the company."

Here's the source post

https://parler.com/post/6e474ef190344fdbab8557b3ebf85ade

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#66

Post by 4bpp »

Relevant SSC article: https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/05/01/neutral-vs-conservativ...

> The moral of the story is: if you’re against witch-hunts, and you promise to found your own little utopian community where witch-hunts will never happen, your new society will end up consisting of approximately three principled civil libertarians and seven zillion witches. It will be a terrible place to live even if witch-hunts are genuinely wrong.

I do wonder what the mainstream's response will be when this website inevitably actualises its witch-coven destiny (though it may already have according to some). Based on the apparent billionaire backing, it may not depend on payment processors (which otherwise seem to be among the most willing pieces of infrastructure to summarily cut off "extremist" customers), but it will probably still require Cloudflare to weather DoS attacks, a DNS record and carriers willing to provide it connectivity.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#67

Post by x86_64Ubuntu »

dannyw wrote: post #19

1. Tech platforms are uncomfortable with certain viewpoints expressed on their platforms and seek to limit these viewpoints. 2. Instead of changing people’s minds (isn’t the evidence overwhelmingly conclusive that people rarely change political viewpoints?), people flock to “community bubbles” like Parler, TheDonald, etc where they feel welcome. 3. This marginalisation leads to increasing extremism; going from the li…

If your idea of a solution includes people arguing with other folks about whether or not their humanity should be recognized, then you will be surprised when no one meets you halfway. It's a horribly simple bad faith argument that anyone should try to "convince" or coddle folks who hold signs such as

>"Coming for Blacks and Indians first welcome to the New World Order."

at their rallies.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/fox-anchor-pauses-mid-segment-...

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#68

Post by Hermel »

ardy42 wrote: post #57
dannyw wrote: post #19

1. Tech platforms are uncomfortable with certain viewpoints expressed on their platforms and seek to limit these viewpoints. 2. Instead of changing people’s minds (isn’t the evidence overwhelmingly conclusive that people rarely change political viewpoints?), people flock to “community bubbles” like Parler, TheDonald, etc where they feel welcome. 3. This marginalisation leads to increasing extremism; going from the li…

> 1. Tech platforms are uncomfortable with certain viewpoints expressed on their platforms and seek to limit these viewpoints. For the most part, those "viewpoints" are verifiable falsehoods, conspiracy theories, and other types of disinformation and misinformation. For instance, the recent migrations to Parler are chiefly people who want to deny the legitimate US presidential election result and spread false claims…

So what? People should be free to discuss stupid and wrong ideas.

Btw: I think conspiracy theories are good indicators for what certain people want to believe. I personally don't want to be disconnected from these indicators.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#69

Post by briantakita »

alphabettsy wrote: post #48
rayiner wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Donald Trump attacked illegal immigration specifically: https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2016/aug/08/tim-kaine/... Also, he attacked accepting refugees from certain high-risk countries (which had been designated as such by the Obama administration). He didn’t say “immigrants bad.” > Kaine has embellished the controversy by saying Trump has said "all Mexicans are rapists." The Democrat doesn’t come close to provi…

When Donald Trump launched his campaign he said; “ When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.” How else is one to take this? He said some are good people…

Trump was referring to the Drug, Weapons, & Human trafficking that was occurring due to the border policy at the time. This illicit trafficking and violence against civilians & journalists is well documented in many sources.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#70

Post by renewiltord »

No one wants to spend time on the Internet listening to a bunch of randos talking about how the Jews are secretly lizard people manipulating the elections except other such crackpots. These platforms are lightning rods.

Let these people go there and convince each other of their fringe conspiracy theories. Freedom of association and all that. If they will stop polluting normal places with their crackpottery we're all better off.

Post reply on HN