Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
In the case of Sarah Jeong there was mention about how her tweets were satire. Those on the right like yourself often choose to post specific singular quotes out of context of the entire conversation. If Twitter saw those tweets as satire, she isn't much to your selectively outrage, breaking their rules. Once again bear in mind. Jones broke those rules over and over and over and over, was warned, and he didn't care. Now he's paying the price. It isn't political speech. It's a business sticking to their established rules. Something many actually criticized Twitter for because it gave Jones so many chances.

To paraphrase the saying, just because you have the right of free speech, it doesn't mean it frees you from consequences of said speech. Jones finally had to learn that lesson.

For Pete's sake, when are we going to reinstitute civics lessons. This has nothing to do with "free speech." The Bill of Rights only protects you against the government interference with your right to speak. If a government agency banned Jones, then you'd be correct in using that term. This same mistake is made over and over because we have moved away from educating people about their Constitutional rights. The NFL bans all types of speech and expression by players and owners, such as not letting them wear certain things on their uniforms, etc. The NFL can ban the players from demonstrating at games. The government can't, but a private company or person can.
 
I have showed it, multiple times in previous comments. Quotes and screenshots.

Search for **** trump supporters.

Search for porn.

Search for violence incitement.

Search for racist content

Search for any “offensive, insensitive, upsetting, intended to disgust, or in exceptionally poor taste" materia on any of the the social media’s or Youtube and you will find it. It’s there whether you deny that it is or not.

Yet Apple still hosts those Apps.

Ergo, the rules are unevenly applied.

How difficult is that to comprehend?
[doublepost=1536441306][/doublepost]

So when someone states the truth about Islamic terrorism, or the truth about Sharia Law, or the truth about pedophilia in the church - is that hate speech or not?
Do you think thats what we are talking about here? Really? Alex Jones is a nut-job that terrorizes victims of school shootings and prompts crazy conspiracy theories that say, among other things, that a certain female politician who won the popular vote for president by 3 million votes, was running a child sex ring out of a basement (that doesn't exist) in a pizza restaurant. He's crazy. He should be committed not allowed to spread his crazy to gullible idiots.
[doublepost=1536442083][/doublepost]
He has a hella lot more than “really? I’m done” though.

Take your hate speech elsewhere.
Sure go ahead and try to muddy the definition of hate speech. It won't work though. We all know what you are doing.
 
Do you think thats what we are talking about here? Really? Alex Jones is a nut-job that terrorizes victims of school shootings and prompts crazy conspiracy theories that say, among other things, that a certain female politician who won the popular vote for president by 3 million votes, was running a child sex ring out of a basement (that doesn't exist) in a pizza restaurant. He's crazy. He should be committed not allowed to spread his crazy to gullible idiots.

And there’s much worse on Twitter, Youtube, Facebook, yet Apple still host those apps.

So my point still stands.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Huck
I think saying good riddance to him is too premature and optimistic. The major mainstream outlets may be silencing him, but as Alex Jones becomes more "extremist" and right-wing radical, the frothing Right-Wing hateful Trump Base will see him as a martyr demigod even more. They will just connect with him using underground channels.

He won't go away. With the imagery of the mainstream media trying to silence and "kill" his presence, Jones will just become even more of a Right-Wing Martyr. The 21st century version of Horst Wessel.

Wow, you just have it all figured out, don't you.
 
Sure go ahead and try to muddy the definition of hate speech. It won't work though. We all know what you are doing.

Your response to me saying there is hate speech directed at Trump supporters:

There is none. also Trump supporters aren't a protected class. They are just people that believe trumps lies.

Not so nice when the shoe is on the other foot, eh? My point this whole time is that hate speech is so open to interpretation it really doesn’t have a clear definition.

So be careful what you wish for because you might just get it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Huck and KGB7
I think saying good riddance to him is too premature and optimistic. The major mainstream outlets may be silencing him, but as Alex Jones becomes more "extremist" and right-wing radical, the frothing Right-Wing hateful Trump Base will see him as a martyr demigod even more. They will just connect with him using underground channels.

He won't go away. With the imagery of the mainstream media trying to silence and "kill" his presence, Jones will just become even more of a Right-Wing Martyr. The 21st century version of Horst Wessel.
That's a bit exaggerated, but the point is right. If you 100% want to go against edgy people like him, silencing publicly is the worst option. Especially with conspiracy theorists. Maybe they kinda have to ban him for harassment and/or slander since that's illegal, but media sites like YouTube should make that very clear and start by just taking down the relevant content.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Huck
And there’s much worse on Twitter, Youtube, Facebook, yet Apple still host those apps.

So my point still stands.
You have no point. Alex Jones app was there to promote Alex jones's hate speech. Twitter, youtube, facebook, are all there as social media sites and are responsible for their own policing. There is a clear difference. Either way, Apple doesn't have to host him at all, and won't, because, and this bears repeating, he is a NUT-JOB.
[doublepost=1536442615][/doublepost]
Your response to me saying there is hate speech directed at Trump supporters:



Not so nice when the shoe is on the other foot, eh? My point this whole time is that hate speech is so open to interpretation it really doesn’t have a clear definition.

So be careful what you wish for because you might just get it.
Wow you really are trying to broaden the definition of hate speech so wide to make it meaningless. Not going to happen. None of that is hate speech. Get it together.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dorje Sylas
You have no point. Alex Jones app was there to promote Alex jones's hate speech. Twitter, youtube, facebook, are all there as social media sites and are responsible for their own policing. There is a clear difference. Either way, Apple doesn't have to host him at all, and won't, because, and this bears repeating, he is a NUT-JOB.

I do have a point but you can’t seem to grasp it for some reason.

My point is the rules are applied unevenly.

Twitter, Youtube, Tinder, Reddit, Facebook all break the same rules as AJ app, yet they remain on the store.

Comprende? It’s not difficult but you seem to be struggling. Try reading it slowly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KGB7 and Huck
Wow you really are trying to broaden the definition of hate speech so wide to make it meaningless. Not going to happen. None of that is hate speech. Get it together.

Exactly. Exactly what the left has done with rape, sexual assault, Nazis, and racism to name a few.

Not so nice when the shoe is on the other foot, eh?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Huck
The only way that model works is with homogenous ethnic populations and Sweden and Norway are finding out these days it ain't working so well anymore.

You make absolutely no sense what so ever. We are talking about high standard of living, good education, long life expectancy etc. That has nothing to do with homogeneous population. Even more so, you just pointed out the Norway and Sweden, countries with one of the highest standard of living in the whole world. You think it’s not working out well for them? Pay a visit, it’s working way better than you can even imagine. BTW. Norwegians hate Trump and his ideology more than any other European nation... https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/t...est-democracy-we-asked-its-people-why-n720151
 
You make absolutely no sense what so ever. We are talking about high standard of living, good education, long life expectancy etc. That has nothing to do with homogeneous population. Even more so, you just pointed out the Norway and Sweden, countries with one of the highest standard of living in the whole world. You think it’s not working out well for them? Pay a visit, it’s working way better than you can even imagine. BTW. Norwegians hate Trump and his ideology more than any other European nation... https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/t...est-democracy-we-asked-its-people-why-n720151

Hating on Trump or on anyone, doesn’t make them any better then Trump.
So much for being the best country in the planet. Perhaps they should enjoy what they have built and turn the other cheek.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Huck
I have showed it, multiple times in previous comments. Quotes and screenshots.

Search for **** trump supporters.

Search for porn.

Search for violence incitement.

Search for racist content

Search for any “offensive, insensitive, upsetting, intended to disgust, or in exceptionally poor taste" materia on any of the the social media’s or Youtube and you will find it. It’s there whether you deny that it is or not.

Yet Apple still hosts those Apps.

Ergo, the rules are unevenly applied.

How difficult is that to comprehend?
[doublepost=1536441306][/doublepost]

So when someone states the truth about Islamic terrorism, or the truth about Sharia Law, or the truth about pedophilia in the church - is that hate speech or not?
Sorry but when asked for sourcing, telling someone else to search for your sourcing doesn't fly.

https://macrumors.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/201327723

Debate

Guidelines: Be willing to engage in fact-based, constructive debate. Look for ways to inform and learn from others.

Rules:
  1. Sources. If you claim that something's a fact, back it up with a source. If you can't produce evidence when someone asks you to cite your sources, we may remove your posts. If you started the thread, then we may remove or close the thread.
  2. Repetition. If you repeat the same claims without adding new information, we might remove your posts. Again, if you started the thread, then we may remove or close the thread.
And sorry if you're still banking on as your single sourcing the selective cut & paste of Jeong's tweets, that isn't enough. It is telling though that your only example of hate speech is certain Jeong tweets of what you selectively consider hate speech though. The same as your examples at the end, you didn't include white supremacy, misogynistic comments, homophobia, sexual harassment or more.

Very telling...

For Pete's sake, when are we going to reinstitute civics lessons. This has nothing to do with "free speech." The Bill of Rights only protects you against the government interference with your right to speak. If a government agency banned Jones, then you'd be correct in using that term. This same mistake is made over and over because we have moved away from educating people about their Constitutional rights. The NFL bans all types of speech and expression by players and owners, such as not letting them wear certain things on their uniforms, etc. The NFL can ban the players from demonstrating at games. The government can't, but a private company or person can.

While I do appreciate the civics lesson, I can only work with & address the examples provided & introduced into the conversation. So if you could share with the rest of the class, I'd really appreciate it.

Case in point for my friend Jsameds who I've tried to tell this numerous times...

This has nothing to do with "free speech." The Bill of Rights only protects you against the government interference with your right to speak. If a government agency banned Jones, then you'd be correct in using that term.

While my friend likes to phrase it as political speech, he seems to think company's are obligated to allow Jones to say as he wished on their private platform. If you think it's unfair or not, big deal. It's their platform to do so. They gave Jones the added courtesy of warning him several times he was crossing the line.

The other sad fact that @Jsameds may want to console himself with, the CEO of Twitter actively sought to protect Jones, and Jones' blithering self still messed that up.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entr...ey-alex-jones-ban_us_5b8dcc15e4b0511db3db4062


Twitter’s CEO Jack Dorsey overrode staff recommendations last month and personally safeguarded continued Twitter access of notorious extreme right-wing conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, The Wall Street Journal reported Monday.

Dorsey also did the same for white supremacist Richard Spencer, sources told the Journal. Spencer — who triggered Nazi salutes to his cries of “hail Trump” at a right-wing conference in Washington last year — was allowed back on Twitter after he was banned.

People like Jones and Spencer are at the heart of a furious debate over access to social media platforms as companies like Twitter and Facebook come under increasing pressure to police hate speech, lies, promotion of violence, threats and harassment that can touch millions of users.

Dorsey has vowed to better police Twitter. But a decision was made last month to allow Jones continued access to the powerful social media platform. Dorsey told a Journal source that’s because he overruled a staff recommendation to ban Jones from Twitter, the newspaper reported. Several Twitter workers were stunned by the decision and even complained about it in tweets, the Journal noted.

Jones, accounts linked to his Infowars podcasts or some of its content have been blocked by Apple’s iTunes, Facebook, YouTube, Spotify, Pinterest and LinkedIn. Companies have cited issues such as hate speech, harassment and promoting violence.

So to say it again, or actually have someone else say it...
truthertech said:
The government can't, but a private company or person can.

So @Jsameds get back to me when you can provide that Jeong or someone like her inspired some nut to go shoot up a pizza place. Or repeatedly trolled victims of a mass shooting.

Jones won't be missed.
 
Last edited:
I’m all for free speech. But there has to be a limit. I’m for banning all right and left wing nuts from tv, radio, internet etc.
 
What a cop out. You obviously don’t feel that strongly then!

You are all words and no action. Typical ‘brave’ keyboard warrior!

Thank you for revealing yourself.

I’d rather voice my opinion than cripple my needs because of politics.
 
Sorry but when asked for sourcing, telling someone else to search for your sourcing doesn't fly.


So you are being willingfully ignorant. I’ve already posted content here and have told you where to find more if you like.

Are you seriously implying there is no offensive content or hate speech on Social media?


[doublepost=1536447131][/doublepost]
What a cop out. You obviously don’t feel that strongly then!

You are all words and no action. Typical ‘brave’ keyboard warrior!

Thank you for revealing yourself.

I do feel strongly about it, but not strongly enough to inconvenience my entire life.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Huck
Fox News has the highest ratings of any cable news station and is extremely constertive. (btw news isn't supposed to be) Alex jones is a nut-job he isn't "news". Conservatives have just as much a presence in the media as anyone.

No. They don’t. Fox News sometimes has the highest ratings because it’s the ONLY mainstream conservative news on TV. CNN has to compete with NBC, ABC, MSNBC, and CBS news for viewers but all of those networks hold essentially the same political views. Conservatives most certainly do not have as much of a presence in the media as anyone. They have a presence sure but you’re lying if you say they have as many tv networks and “news” outlets. They simply don’t. There are likely a lot of reasons for this including the obvious which is that the aidiece for cable news is larger on the liberal side of the political spectrum so there are more networks but I also think most of those companies are owned by liberal leaning people and they want their views to be the mainstream.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jsameds
They start with the most controversial one to create a precedent then they go on suppressing the rest while they redefine the meaning of hate speech along the way. Remember communism, a left ideology that killed more than 60 million people whom did not agree with the state agenda or worked against it.

So all the tech companies that make billions are secretly one big vast commie conspiracy to move us to bread lines and murder people who don’t want to stand in bread lines.

I wish Alex Jones was still around to expose all of it. :(
 
  • Like
Reactions: JayMysterio
There is none. also Trump supporters aren't a protected class. They are just people that believe trumps lies.

So if you don’t fall under a “protected class” then its okay for people to harass you verbally? That’s basically what you’re saying here.
 
So you are being willingfully ignorant and are seriously saying there is no offensive content or hate speech on Social media.

lol ok o_O
No. :cool:

But not so nice try with the deflection, avoiding the issue, and avoiding providing sourcing for previously repeated over & over claims.

You find that tweet by Jeong that led to a shooting anywhere?

If you want to play who gets the last word, please let that be it.

Otherwise carry on without me, the same way Twitter will without Jones. ;)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.