Banning of Conservatives on Social Media (Page 9/13)
rinselberg JAN 15, 03:49 AM
Thomas L. Friedman is the author of quite a few books including "The World Is Flat" and "Thank You For Being Late." He's also a Pulitzer Prize-wining opinion columnist whose latest column has just been published in the New York Times. Reasoning that Trump's own words are Trump's worst enemy, Tom Friedman implicitly invoked "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" when he opened an on-air interview with MSNBC anchor Brian Williams by suggesting that Twitter should restore Trump's access to his notorious @realDonaldTrump Twitter account.

"Here's your mobile phone, Mr President. Your @realDonaldTrump account on Twitter has been reactivated for you. Knock yourself out."

January 13, 2021.
2+ minutes.
https://youtu.be/olXxmFQYRZc

[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-15-2021).]

sourmash JAN 15, 07:10 AM
Dorsey is what a heroine user looks like. And since Twitter and big tech is part of the oligarchy that rules America they can't have a populist mucking about.
maryjane JAN 15, 09:54 AM

quote
Originally posted by sourmash:

Dorsey is what a heroine user looks like. And since Twitter and big tech is part of the oligarchy that rules America they can't have a populist mucking about.



Is that someone that abuses a female superhero?
olejoedad JAN 15, 11:00 AM
He does look like a junkie.
maryjane JAN 15, 02:13 PM

quote
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
I will withhold my opinion until Mary Jane tells me how I should feel about this.


You will be waiting a very very VERY long time.

I think the video is on par with most of the rest of the contemporary conservative videos of this genre, tho I think he has strayed a bit from the usual presentation. Most have some form of an American flag in the background, and a patriotic motto of some sort, like "Come and Take It' or "Shall not be Infringed Upon" or a large copy the 1st amendment or even the preamble to the Declaration of Independence visible. This is to set the tone and 'warmth' as well as to give the scene some sort of legitimacy to the viewer. In this case tho, 'they' have chosen to do it by the little test stating the speaker is a former active duty US Army Ranger. The woodstove, more or less a prop to make the viewer comfortable and harken back to the old 40s/50s fireside chats. "A man of the people' visual.
Aren't we all.....

As for the body of the presentation, beginning around 1:30, he tells you (us) how you (we) are supposed to feel, so neither myself or anyone else has to and then goes on to explain to us all, what the constitution and it's amendments say. Stuff most of us learned many many decades ago, while he was still in knee pants.
Then, "Good ol fashioned patriots" he says. "I remind you". "God given Rights". All the usual and obligatory talking points of the conservative version of social justice wargaming.

"They're winning the battle of ideas".
He then says "Guys, speak" "Don't be afraid to ruffle anyone's feathers" .

I'm not and never have been, whether in regards to gun ownership or Covid19. But evidently, I have indeed ruffled a few feathers because I won't be led by rhetoric and hyperbole. Show me the beef. Show me the proof.

These videos used to be in competition against their opposite on the other side of the aisle. Negating the talking points of the left and the socialists.

Nowadays tho, as subscribers, likes, followers become all important, they are all in competition with each other, competing with each other on the right for the attention of fellow conservatives, but the basic 'message' really hasn't changed at all. If you see one of these in the last 12 months, you've basically seen them all.
Everything he said, we all learned before we ever got out of jr high school, and very very few of us have forgotten any of it.
So, what's the real purpose behind these videos?

It's:
"Look At Me while I tell you how you are supposed to feel or think." (and don't forget to subscribe, like and share so others can look at me too.)

[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 01-15-2021).]

82-T/A [At Work] JAN 15, 03:16 PM

quote
Originally posted by maryjane:

You will be waiting a very very VERY long time.





Didn't even have to wait a second, apparently?
maryjane JAN 15, 05:24 PM

quote
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
Didn't even have to wait a second, apparently?


Oh, I didn't tell you how YOU should interpret the video. I just said how I did.
But perhaps 2.5 can find you a video that explains how time lapse works, since you think approx 24 hrs = 1 second.

Ironic, how so many that go on and on about the 'loss of freedom of speech' get so upset when anyone voices an opinion that differs from their own.
That also helps to explain why so many here have 'politics' disabled.
82-T/A [At Work] JAN 15, 06:23 PM

quote
Originally posted by maryjane:

24 hrs = 1 second.





Time between "you'll be waiting a very long time" to literally the next line where you then go on about stuff.
maryjane JAN 16, 02:28 AM
Point taken, kind of. How long it took you to read it versus how long it took me to create it are 2 completely different things.

You will find, that the task you appear to have undertaken, that is, to curb me from posting my opinions to be a bit more daunting than you have previously experienced with others that disagreed with your own opinions.
Good luck with it tho, and do let me know if you need a tissue.

Fats JAN 16, 06:08 PM
Why do people keep saying that Social Media sites would suddenly start censoring people if 230 is repealed... We are already heavily censored, taking 230 away would simply mean everyone would be censored, not just one group.

There are things I cannot post without being put in "Facebook Jail", or my post simply being removed. There are also many people who are "shadowbanned" on Twitter simply because of their political leanings.

They already govern our speech and remove anything they don't agree with. I don't see how anything would change for us.