Censorship by Apple Amazon Facebook

Is there anything specific you are referring to ? Not DT ?

???

I have concerns about the hold companies such as twitter have over public discourse. As I said before it's ok cheering Twitter for banning trump but without Twitter i dont think trump would have become president. And what if a trump gets to a position of power in a company such as Twitter.

I think that,according to someone who's been counting them up, TRUMP has uttered more than 20,000 lies in the last four years.

How much more proof would anyone need?

This poster is taking about banning parler, I assume

I dont know what they are talking about but I think we as a society need to have a conversation about free speech and social media, what would happen if someone like trump was running Twitter or the equivalent.

This poster is taking about banning parler, I assume

That’s what I thought too, Hithere.

Stormystar My opinion for what it is worth, is that free speech ends when there is incitement to hatred and violence.

Parler was used to orchestrate the insurrection at the Capitol last Thursday and I think Amazon have done the right thing in no longer providing an internet platform for it.

Story here www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/business/technology/google-suspends-parler-social-networking-app-from-play-store-1.4454339%3fmode=amp

OP has posted and vanished .......

Anyone who thinks it is a bad thing to close down a forum used mostly for hate speech and for organising acts of terrorism probably won’t find a lot of support among Gransnetters!

I’ve said this elsewhere on the site, but it’s worth repeating. None of these social media companies has ‘stopped’ free speech; they have merely declined to host certain people who use these platforms to amplify messages of hate, lies etc.

Anyone banned from these sites may write a book, a letter, a newspaper article etc. - or simply find a public place to spout forth from. Nobody has been gagged, they’ve just had their means of spreading falsehoods limited.

More from the BBC on the sort of websites that the OP supports. I think we can all see where he or she is coming from.
Parler social network sues Amazon for pulling support www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-55615214

Grannyactivist people who write to newspapers or write books etc are subject to laws about libel or inciting hatred or violence, and so are the publishers of such content.
There are no laws yet governing social media sites or internet-hosting platforms. That’s the difference.

Twitter have been enabling trump for years, under no circumstances do I want those platforms governing free speech. Only a month ago Twitter were defending their decision not to ban trump.

Galaxy

Twitter have been enabling trump for years, under no circumstances do I want those platforms governing free speech. Only a month ago Twitter were defending their decision not to ban trump.

Galaxy, you seem to forget that these social media platforms are not owned by the users. They can do what they wish, their house, their rules. If users do not like them use an alternative, if they lose their users changes will come from within although I am sure that would not be the case.

With regards to Parler suing Amazon, they will be laughed out of court. If Parler were any good they would have had their own servers and not hang onto the shirt tails of Amazon.

The owners of Twitter have the right to do whatever they want with them.

In the same was the British tabloid press were allowed to print shocking lies in the run up to the UK election.

As prestbury has pointed out, these are not public utilities. They have owners. I may HATE some of the stuff they publish/allow, but I and every other user has zero control.

*In the same way...

DT is a multi millionaire. Why doesn't he set up his own server/social media?

They do indeed have the right to do what they want to do, that doesnt stop it being dangerous. And if a trump controls Twitter what then.

Here you can listen to Justine Roberts (Mumsnet and Gransnet) who ultimately controls our posts.

www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000r6v8/politics-live-12012021

Do you know that there is quite a concerted attempt to shut MN down, it doesnt work because Justine is very brave, but if she wasnt women would not have a forum to discuss issues relating to their sex. We cant just pretend that all this is ok. Its luck mostly.

Galaxy Do you know that there is quite a concerted attempt to shut MN down, it doesnt work because Justine is very brave
who’s trying to shut MN down?

Who is Justine?

Justine Roberts founder of Mumsnet,

Many corner shops have notice-boards in their windows where customers can post notices of things for sale, or planned concerts and so on. If one of those customers used the board to co-ordinate arrangements to torch the garden shed of someone they disliked, the shopkeeper would be justified in taking down the notice, and banning that customer from using the service in future.

If it was left in position, the owner of the shed would believe that the shopkeeper was partly to blame for any damage that was caused - and would be right, as the publishing of the plan and the contact details for anyone wishing to join in would be a major factor. I don't think that anyone would be so crass as to try to support the customer if he/she tried to claim their rights had been violated.

What was organised by Parler via Twitter was just as illegal, and involved many more people and more targets.