Better late than never
Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler
891–900 of 1001 posts
Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler
#892I'm just going to come out and say something that I've had a hard self reflective time coming to the conclusion of. I don't believe in free speech without limits. I have strongly felt that the actions taken by these companies is morally and ethically the right thing to do, for any business and that is inconsistent with believing in true free speech. My line for free speech seems to lie in speech that incites violence…
The question is - is it OK to shut people/companies down who themselves don’t believe in free speech?
Sometimes you have to silence people to let everyone else have their rights. And that’s what is happening here.
Trump supporters don’t support free speech or freedom of expression as a concept to be applied to everyone. They just want to have free speech themselves and for everyone else to shut up.
Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler
#893I'm just going to come out and say something that I've had a hard self reflective time coming to the conclusion of. I don't believe in free speech without limits. I have strongly felt that the actions taken by these companies is morally and ethically the right thing to do, for any business and that is inconsistent with believing in true free speech. My line for free speech seems to lie in speech that incites violence…
I have not yet concluded whether I believe in free speech without limits, but I can at least say with confidence the following: - Freedom of speech is of extremely high importance for any free society and should not be taken for granted - Removing it in any capacity should be done with extreme care and free of any bias one way or another, with a lot of thought put into any future consequences - Speech without a platf…
Free speech without limits. Free speech enforced to any platform. In my opinion can be called as dictature of free speech.
Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler
#894I'm just going to come out and say something that I've had a hard self reflective time coming to the conclusion of. I don't believe in free speech without limits. I have strongly felt that the actions taken by these companies is morally and ethically the right thing to do, for any business and that is inconsistent with believing in true free speech. My line for free speech seems to lie in speech that incites violence…
> or speech that discriminates against people for immutable characteristics of their person
Often said, yet it somehow very often excludes religion, which is not immutable, and very often includes simple matters such as intelligence, which is immutable.
I find that more often than not, when a man speaks of such “immutable" traits, what he really means is “whatever the culture I grew up in arbitrarily treats much like an ethnicity, a tribe, something to owe fealty to” — religion is that in many cultures, but intelligence is not.
And I stress how cultural it is: it is often noted that in Japan religion is not treated as such a tribe, culturally, and that Japanese persons often find it curious how residents of other cultures can owe a lifelong fealty to a single religion rather than experiencing elements of multiple religions as it be suitable.
One could argue that such things are so associated with immutability merely because they are treated as a fealty in their respective cultures, a lifelong allegiance, and that switching sides is considered such a betrayal, that they are culturally made immutable, even though there is obviously no reason why religion or political affiliation should be.
Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler
#895I'm just going to come out and say something that I've had a hard self reflective time coming to the conclusion of. I don't believe in free speech without limits. I have strongly felt that the actions taken by these companies is morally and ethically the right thing to do, for any business and that is inconsistent with believing in true free speech. My line for free speech seems to lie in speech that incites violence…
In South Africa we’re taught from a young age that while everyone has a “right to x”, codified in the Bill of Rights, each right comes with a “responsibility”.
My “right to free speech” should not limit your “right to religion” or your “right to political association”, and in this case “your right to safety”.
While South Africa has a lot of improvement to do, the understanding that rights need to be self-limiting in order to remain sustainable is a very good starting point in a constitutional democracy.
Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler
#896Given that there have been BLM protests for months, do we actually have reason to believe that if Trump had won the extreme left would not have been talking about performing similar disruptive actions? How then would these companies have reacted?
Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler
#897I'm just going to come out and say something that I've had a hard self reflective time coming to the conclusion of. I don't believe in free speech without limits. I have strongly felt that the actions taken by these companies is morally and ethically the right thing to do, for any business and that is inconsistent with believing in true free speech. My line for free speech seems to lie in speech that incites violence…
The same thing could be said about Twitter yet they aren't being pulled of from the app store. This wont end well.
Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler
#898I’ve said it before: I find this highly disturbing. Especially the sense in which it is coordinated. Amazon, Google and Apple acting together to shut down a platform that has been very clear about its stance on content moderation from the outset. Free speech is not just any value. Sooner or later you will find yourself on the side of an issue where your speech will be attacked. Then there is the always present double…
Isn't this the hidden hand of Adam Smith? If FAANGT doesn't ban/remove the fascists then they face huge commercial pressure - if they do then the commercial pressure (from the other side) is much less. The market is speaking - the CEO's of these companies have decided that the tide has turned and it's in their shareholder's interest to ban.
I think this is a terrible way to run society - no company should have the scale or power of these companies, but it turns out that this is what can happen if you run things by a market. To argue that they shouldn't do this is basically arguing against a market economy!
Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler
#899I'm just going to come out and say something that I've had a hard self reflective time coming to the conclusion of. I don't believe in free speech without limits. I have strongly felt that the actions taken by these companies is morally and ethically the right thing to do, for any business and that is inconsistent with believing in true free speech. My line for free speech seems to lie in speech that incites violence…
The law is not 'free speech without limits.' There are lots of types of illegal speech, many of them much less exciting than incitement. Practically, it can be difficult to bring court cases related to every potential violation of the law related to speech as it relates to online platforms. This is partly a practical issue. Due process is expensive, and only the courts can provide due process adequately.
When it becomes very cheap to violate the law and remains expensive to enforce the law, obviously we see a lot of lawbreaking ensue. The solution ought not to be to sweep away the First Amendment, but to do a combination of things that:
1. Makes it feasible to enforce the law on internet speech when and where it applies 2. Go enforce that law
The First Amendment exists in a context of assumed liability for publishers. This may have been more practical when there aren't that many publishers. When there are $billions of publishers, the deterrent impact of liability fear just isn't there. Regulation is also an alternative to making law enforcement more practical and affordable. If you don't want to expend the resources prosecuting every violation of the law, you have to take some proactive steps to manage the environment to reduce potential violations. This is why you have the FCC regulating content on broadcast media, for example.
Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler
#900I'm just going to come out and say something that I've had a hard self reflective time coming to the conclusion of. I don't believe in free speech without limits. I have strongly felt that the actions taken by these companies is morally and ethically the right thing to do, for any business and that is inconsistent with believing in true free speech. My line for free speech seems to lie in speech that incites violence…
As much as I dislike your comment, I have to defend your right to say it.
I'd rather live in a world where I can view opposing viewpoints with ease. Imagine you not being able to express what you currently wrote - openly, and being modded out, your message never seeing the light of day because someone somewhere could possibly worry that they will lose advertisers who chose to misinterpret it as a call to violence. We are currently there.
PS - I believe what you wrote can lead to extreme violence, yet the world has the right to see (and likely not react violently at all but should even the slightest possibility allow censorship?)