Not many rules exist on the dumping ground for cute cat videos and short bursts of verbal diarrhea that we call the Internet. There's Rule 34, the so-called "Streisand effect" , and Ethan Zuckerman'scute cat theory of digital activism, but there just isn't much that galvanized humanity to collectively agree on anything. However, in the wake of Charlottesville, much of the Internet was forced to face the reality that it has helped empower the very hate groups responsible for the death of Heather Heyer.
Rather than engage in the usual arguments about what constitutes free speech, the Internet’s hivemind has decided to slap neo-Nazis with comically large banhammers
Oh don't worry, Dom. The Internet is still doing the former. And even some of the domains issuing the banhammer are still fretting about the issue with Dawson's Creek levels of angst.
I'm not changing your argument, if I understand it properly. Yes, other countries have hate speech laws. You seem to favor them, but so what? The pendulum in this country has swung both ways, but usually ends up in favor of speech, period, There is no appetite for them among our lawmakers, so wishing for them is a non starter. Yet the private media, whether a single printing press, an electronic conglomerate, or an internet provider, has traditionally been the vehicle for publicizing hate, as well as more noble causes. The fourth estate has always by design been privately owned in this country, with all the strengths and flaws inherent in private business reporting on affairs of state, without prior restraint. It is not an unalloyed good. I have seen and covered its effects for over 30 years as a newspaperman. I will note here that my previous point is valid, though. Corporations are effectively enforcing rules against hate speech on their own and across many platforms, mostly because it's good business and publicity. "On May 31, 2016, Facebook, Google, Microsoft, and Twitter, jointly agreed to a European Union code of conduct obligating them to review "[the] majority of valid notifications for removal of illegal hate speech" posted on their services within 24 hours." Those "terms of service" have the force of law and the First Amendment can't stop those companies from banning hate speech, just as the First Amendment can't prevent hate speech itself. And the haters are being denied private media outlets as their megaphones, their chief means of reaching their followers and acolytes. Without them they are relegated to boom box mikes on the local quad, or courthouse yard. It's not a perfect solution, but none really exist, and at least right now it is kicking hater ass, even without hate speech laws. .
Tucker Carlson is a talking haircut. He is only propagandizing this cause Mr Himmler wont return his calls. If he were just a tiny inchy bit honest, he would find out why we even have "public utilities" in the first place. Google meets absolutely no cause here. None. Him and his minions simply don't like other viewpoints and/or the truth being heard. IMHO, public utilities is a form of socialism anyway.
Well, I live in a country with hate speech laws, and we have plenty of free speech.
You're just not supposed to harm people with it.
And that's why I said "laws," not "terms of service." Changing my argument to suit you doesn't really work.
Rather than engage in the usual arguments about what constitutes free speech, the Internet’s hivemind has decided to slap neo-Nazis with comically large banhammers
Oh don't worry, Dom. The Internet is still doing the former. And even some of the domains issuing the banhammer are still fretting about the issue with Dawson's Creek levels of angst.
Oh cool. That's the story I did a few days ago
http://twoplustwoequals7.bl...
https://uploads.disquscdn.c...
Classification as a Public Utility is actually one step beyond Title II/Common Carrier. That's saved for the hydro/natural gas/water/etc carriers.
Point well taken though. Carlson would melt down if he was asked to oust Ajit Pai and support NN.
I'm not changing your argument, if I understand it properly. Yes, other countries have hate speech laws. You seem to favor them, but so what? The pendulum in this country has swung both ways, but usually ends up in favor of speech, period, There is no appetite for them among our lawmakers, so wishing for them is a non starter. Yet the private media, whether a single printing press, an electronic conglomerate, or an internet provider, has traditionally been the vehicle for publicizing hate, as well as more noble causes. The fourth estate has always by design been privately owned in this country, with all the strengths and flaws inherent in private business reporting on affairs of state, without prior restraint. It is not an unalloyed good. I have seen and covered its effects for over 30 years as a newspaperman. I will note here that my previous point is valid, though. Corporations are effectively enforcing rules against hate speech on their own and across many platforms, mostly because it's good business and publicity. "On May 31, 2016, Facebook, Google, Microsoft, and Twitter, jointly agreed to a European Union code of conduct obligating them to review "[the] majority of valid notifications for removal of illegal hate speech" posted on their services within 24 hours." Those "terms of service" have the force of law and the First Amendment can't stop those companies from banning hate speech, just as the First Amendment can't prevent hate speech itself. And the haters are being denied private media outlets as their megaphones, their chief means of reaching their followers and acolytes. Without them they are relegated to boom box mikes on the local quad, or courthouse yard. It's not a perfect solution, but none really exist, and at least right now it is kicking hater ass, even without hate speech laws. .
"I am no going to google it" is kind of like the nerd "hold my beer", because you know someone's gonna google that shit.
And, today, the internet actually surprises me. A google search of kissin cousins brings up mostly links to the Elvis Presley movie.
True that.
Tucker Carlson is a talking haircut. He is only propagandizing this cause Mr Himmler wont return his calls. If he were just a tiny inchy bit honest, he would find out why we even have "public utilities" in the first place. Google meets absolutely no cause here. None. Him and his minions simply don't like other viewpoints and/or the truth being heard. IMHO, public utilities is a form of socialism anyway.
Idk, I'd rather they jerk each other off where we can keep an eye on them (shudders) than festering in the dark web
Everybody uses them, everybody pays.
My relief to only be a one-dimensional cardboard cartoon superhero is palpable, who would want that job?
I love John Barrowman.
Dammit Spotify! My Screwdriver playlist is missing!
Will someone please get this woman some help? Yikes.