LOL, well that's a new one. Can't say I've heard of this particular conspiracy before.
Now I'm imagining George Bush standing in the Oval Office and talking to his advisors. "You know who we really need to get rid of? THAT DAMNED EAZY-E!"
General Apple, Facebook, Spotify and Google/Youtube BAN Infowars Alex Jones
- Thread starter sparkuri
- Start date
-
- Tags
- alex jones ban facebook jones
Now I'm imagining George Bush standing in the Oval Office and talking to his advisors. "You know who we really need to get rid of? THAT DAMNED EAZY-E!"
It would be great to see people stand up. We should all be cutting Facebook out of our lives anyway, even without the Alex Jones shit.
I've never understood the appeal of social media in the first place. I don't use Facebook or Twitter, so I can certainly say that these things aren't required to live from day to day. I get by fine without them. I also don't use any Apple products.
Google is more difficult to cut out of my life. Even though I bitch about Google, admittedly I use YouTube and their search engine, and I carry an Android phone. If there was an actual organized movement to tell Google to go fuck itself though, I would find a way to get on board.
A friend of mine was telling me the other day that we need new (different) Twitter and YouTube alternatives that respect free speech and that aren't collecting all kinds of data on you. I agree with that.
I'd never be able to give up YouTube.
It is funny how Google collects data on you. I pirated a video series the other day and then I started getting advertisements from Google for said video series.
I'm thinkin HAH, you fucks aren't smart as you think you are. I'm aint buyin sheeeeeeet
I like YouTube as well, but I think instead someone should create a YouTube alternative that is serious about protecting free speech.
As for paying for shit, I think at this point I'd rather pay for shit than continue on with the current model of getting free accounts but "paying" for those accounts with all the data these companies are collecting.
i cut fb out 8 years ago and it was the best thing i ever did. i rejoined fb a year ago to watch fights on facebook watch .it has changed so much since back in the day . i basicaly have a ghost account and all the toxic fucks and drama whores that used to be on facebook have left for snapchat and instagram.now my notifications are from a local buy and sell .tom jones has posted a set of 245/75/17 tires for 300 bucks
I wonder what impact all this de-platforming is going to have on Jones's viewership.
Last edited:
Alex Jones and his InfoWars media appear to have gained in popularity after Facebook, Apple, Google, Spotify, and Pinterest removed the majority of his pages, channels, podcasts, and profiles from their platforms.
The InfoWars app for iPhone became the third top news app in Apple’s App Store on Aug. 8, surpassed only by the Twitter app and the News Break aggregator. The app overtook all other news media companies, including CNN, Fox News, and The New York Times.
(Screenshot via Apple App Store)
InfoWars was also the no. 1 trending app on Google Play.
Jones, a long-time radio host, has made a name for himself as an alternative news outlet. He’s faced frequent criticism for making controversial, sometimes unverified, claims and for his hot-tempered outbursts. He is currently also facing a defamation suit by parents of the victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting.
On Aug. 6, within 12 hours of each other, the main InfoWars pages on Facebook were shut down, and its main channels and podcasts were removed from Apple’s iTunes, Google’s Youtube, and Spotify. The companies all cited violations of “hate speech” policies as a reason. Pinterest and LinkedIn have also removed Jones’s profiles since then.
However, the ban appears to have backfired.
Not only have his apps ballooned in popularity, but the ban triggered the interest of many people who had been oblivious or dismissive of Jones before.
Searches for his name grew 50-fold on Google between the evening of Aug. 5 and morning of Aug. 7 and was still more than 10 times up by the afternoon of Aug. 8.
just as plannedAlex Jones and his InfoWars media appear to have gained in popularity after Facebook, Apple, Google, Spotify, and Pinterest removed the majority of his pages, channels, podcasts, and profiles from their platforms.
The InfoWars app for iPhone became the third top news app in Apple’s App Store on Aug. 8, surpassed only by the Twitter app and the News Break aggregator. The app overtook all other news media companies, including CNN, Fox News, and The New York Times.
(Screenshot via Apple App Store)
InfoWars was also the no. 1 trending app on Google Play.
Jones, a long-time radio host, has made a name for himself as an alternative news outlet. He’s faced frequent criticism for making controversial, sometimes unverified, claims and for his hot-tempered outbursts. He is currently also facing a defamation suit by parents of the victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting.
On Aug. 6, within 12 hours of each other, the main InfoWars pages on Facebook were shut down, and its main channels and podcasts were removed from Apple’s iTunes, Google’s Youtube, and Spotify. The companies all cited violations of “hate speech” policies as a reason. Pinterest and LinkedIn have also removed Jones’s profiles since then.
However, the ban appears to have backfired.
Not only have his apps ballooned in popularity, but the ban triggered the interest of many people who had been oblivious or dismissive of Jones before.
Searches for his name grew 50-fold on Google between the evening of Aug. 5 and morning of Aug. 7 and was still more than 10 times up by the afternoon of Aug. 8.
I have much to say on this topic, but not much time right now. 3 things to keep in mind.
Hate speech as defined by the American Bar Association is:
"[A]ny kind of speech that incites to hatred, violence, and discrimination and tends to “offend, threaten, or insult groups based on race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation disability, or other traits.”
In Europe, the Council of Europe recommendation on hate speech defines hate as “… all forms of expression which spread, incite, promote or justify racial hatred, xenophobia, anti-Semitism or other forms of hatred based on intolerance, including: intolerance expressed by aggressive nationalism and ethnocentrism, discrimination and hostility against minorities, migrants and people of immigrant origin.”
Under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, hate speech is defined as “any advocacy of national, racial, or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.”
That's to say nothing of the individual platforms terms of service. When considering the case of Jones, we'd need to look at whether he has been a platform for hate speech under these codifications, but also under the heading of deliberately spreading false or misleading information with the effect of inciting violence or harm.
Alex Jones should not be conflated with the political right or any attempt to suppress their voices. It would be erroneous to do so.
Hate speech as defined by the American Bar Association is:
"[A]ny kind of speech that incites to hatred, violence, and discrimination and tends to “offend, threaten, or insult groups based on race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation disability, or other traits.”
In Europe, the Council of Europe recommendation on hate speech defines hate as “… all forms of expression which spread, incite, promote or justify racial hatred, xenophobia, anti-Semitism or other forms of hatred based on intolerance, including: intolerance expressed by aggressive nationalism and ethnocentrism, discrimination and hostility against minorities, migrants and people of immigrant origin.”
Under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, hate speech is defined as “any advocacy of national, racial, or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.”
That's to say nothing of the individual platforms terms of service. When considering the case of Jones, we'd need to look at whether he has been a platform for hate speech under these codifications, but also under the heading of deliberately spreading false or misleading information with the effect of inciting violence or harm.
Alex Jones should not be conflated with the political right or any attempt to suppress their voices. It would be erroneous to do so.
1
1031
Guest
But he specifically explained what he doesn't like about FB. Your response would indicate you don't have a problem with hypocrisy.
1
1031
Guest
The divide and conquer strategy is working.
Whose strategy is it?
Whoever is controlling the narrative and or via the msm.
obama made propaganda against the citizens legal FYI
I don't see how Jones did anything worse than fake news CNN did. Jones talking about the Sandy Hook being fake was an insult to the families of the victims and put them in danger.
But fake news CNN and other outlets have been vilifying Trump and his supporters to the point where your average Trump supporter has been getting assaulted, spat on and actually have to fear for their safety.
They've also thrown police officers under the bus, perpetuating this garbage narrative that all police officers are racist hit men looking for an excuse to kill black people. This has put cops - who have the most dangerous and thankless jobs - in even more danger.
This is much worse than Jones' bullshit rhetoric on his limited platform. More people have access to CNN and take them seriously.
But fake news CNN and other outlets have been vilifying Trump and his supporters to the point where your average Trump supporter has been getting assaulted, spat on and actually have to fear for their safety.
They've also thrown police officers under the bus, perpetuating this garbage narrative that all police officers are racist hit men looking for an excuse to kill black people. This has put cops - who have the most dangerous and thankless jobs - in even more danger.
This is much worse than Jones' bullshit rhetoric on his limited platform. More people have access to CNN and take them seriously.
LOL. That's amazing.Alex Jones and his InfoWars media appear to have gained in popularity after Facebook, Apple, Google, Spotify, and Pinterest removed the majority of his pages, channels, podcasts, and profiles from their platforms.
The InfoWars app for iPhone became the third top news app in Apple’s App Store on Aug. 8, surpassed only by the Twitter app and the News Break aggregator. The app overtook all other news media companies, including CNN, Fox News, and The New York Times.
(Screenshot via Apple App Store)
InfoWars was also the no. 1 trending app on Google Play.
Jones, a long-time radio host, has made a name for himself as an alternative news outlet. He’s faced frequent criticism for making controversial, sometimes unverified, claims and for his hot-tempered outbursts. He is currently also facing a defamation suit by parents of the victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting.
On Aug. 6, within 12 hours of each other, the main InfoWars pages on Facebook were shut down, and its main channels and podcasts were removed from Apple’s iTunes, Google’s Youtube, and Spotify. The companies all cited violations of “hate speech” policies as a reason. Pinterest and LinkedIn have also removed Jones’s profiles since then.
However, the ban appears to have backfired.
Not only have his apps ballooned in popularity, but the ban triggered the interest of many people who had been oblivious or dismissive of Jones before.
Searches for his name grew 50-fold on Google between the evening of Aug. 5 and morning of Aug. 7 and was still more than 10 times up by the afternoon of Aug. 8.
I wonder what the people at CNN were thinking when they saw that fucking InfoWars sat higher on the charts than their own news app.
Not to say that the right has always been immune to acts of violence, but it's undoubtedly true that people on the left are much more prone to being violent and destructive against people they don't agree with, and I don't know why that is. What is it about being on the left politically that engenders the mindset that it's okay to literally force their beliefs on others and destroy those who won't conform?
They reject the democratic process.
Last edited:
"We can and must write in a language which sows among the masses hate, revulsion, and scorn toward those who disagree with us." Vladimir Ilyich Lenin
M
member 1013
Guest
This quote originally comes from Orwell.
No offense, but do you know what the right is?
As a fan of history, it would be hard to disagree with his statement.
I know that there was never any equivalent to Antifa when Obama was in office, even though a lot of conservatives just straight hated him and thought he was ruining the country.
Conservatives also weren't out harassing liberal politicians and pundits on the streets and in restaurants when he was president.
I also can't remember any meaningful equivalent (and by meaningful I'm referring to a group that took real action) to so-called revolutionary groups like the Weather Underground on the right, but there were a lot of leftist groups like that in the 60s and 70s.
Maybe you could equate Tim McVeigh with the right in some fringe way, but that's the only thing that's coming to mind regarding any sort of violent right-wing counterpart.
Last edited:
You likely didn't see right wing groups on the move during the Obama administration in the same way as you see Antifa today because there wasn't an actual courtship of extremists by the President of the United States meriting that response. Trumpito had Bannon in his administration, still has Miller, played the "both sides" card during Charlottesville and has engaged in jingoist rhetoric as his main strategy. To pretend he's just a run of the mill conservative in office comparable to any of the last several presidents is disingenuous and doesn't situate him within the broader context of global affairs that's seen Le Pen come close to the Presidency in France, Italy's swing rightward, a sufficiently empowerered UKIP forcing Brexit and Bibi Netanyahu consolidating his apartheid rule in Israel. Nearly every leading Republican in the party agreed he was a threat to sanity and security until he won the primaries.
Further, during the Obama admin, we had Cliven Bundy and his band of merry men who bused in supporters from around the country, telling them to come armed and ready to do violence against the state. Militia groups like The Minutemen have sat taking rifle shots at crossing immigrants for decades.
In the 1960s, there were massive groups that came out to protest everything from school integration to counter protesting in favor of Vietnam. The reason you don't know their names is because they've been consigned to the dustbin of history for being so terribly wrong.
Another fundamental element missing in this discussion is that leftist groups typically organize on the basis of collective action being the only available lever to put pressure on the state, which frequently puts them into open conflict with the state. Collective efforts sometimes go awry and can manifest violently when agitating against the state, but the state has much more capacity to do violence on its citizenry, which it all too frequently has exercised.
Here is where I'll agree with you though. There are elements within today's left that have completely lost the plot and succumbed to the same nihilism they accuse those on the right of embracing. Their ideology is one of fighting, but not as interested in imagining concrete alternatives. There is great disagreement on the left about what is contra-Trump and to me there's a general failure to understand what situations on the ground really mean. The Democratic Party, never the actual left, but just the center right party in the US, has become a vehicle somewhat up for grabs in a way the GOP was in 2015-16. Still, engagement with the political process is hotly debated. The left and right of today are in oddly similar positions, struggling to find their identity.
A fair response.
Perhaps the question we should ask here is: When is violence justified?
I'm sure we'd all agree that violence is sometimes justified. The American revolution, for instance, was a series of acts of violence for a political purpose. Was it justified? Yes, I think so. But if you decide to escalate things to that level, you better damn well know what you're getting yourself into.
What I can tell you is that when people on the right such as myself see Antifa and their ilk harassing their political enemies, acting violently toward them, trying to silence opposing voices, and doing shit like knocking out the windows at Marine Corps recruiting offices, what we see are people who are enemies of freedom--quite literally in the sense that they are trying to constrict the rights of others to propagate ideas while trying to force their own way of thinking on those around them.
Take for instance the way that every time a controversial conservative figure tries to speak on campus at Berkeley left-wing activists always show up trying to shut them down by shouting them down, instead of letting them speak and then engaging their ideas in a civil manner.
And this is what happens in the BEST of times. In the worst of times, supporters of the speakers are attacked and buildings on the campus are physically destroyed, as happened when Milo was scheduled to speak.
I assume you're familiar with the incident I'm talking about but if not:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-PSYPrE5LrQ
I mean, c'mon, setting shit on fire and pepper spraying the opposition just because you don't like their ideas? Where is the respect for freedom of speech? For a group that champions diversity, why not diversity of thought?
To be fair and clear, I'm not tarring all people on the left with the same brush. I get that the majority of people on the left are more moderate than this, as most people in life in general tend to be fairly moderate. I mean, I have friends who are on the left politically and they aren't running around doing Antifa shit. But the problem is that the contingent of people on the left who ARE doing this shit is large enough that it's starting to look mainstream. A surprising number of left-wing believers are performing radical actions and the more it happens, the less it looks like a fringe thing and the more it looks like standard operating procedure.
I don't mind protesting. People are more than free to exercise their right to peaceful assembly. But the keyword there is peaceful.
And for the people who are acting this way, and acting violently and destructively, they need to understand and accept the consequences of their actions. If I go to watch Ben Shapiro speak and some fool in a mask gets mad at me because I don't think like he does and he punches me, and this causes me to fear for my physical well-being and pull out a gun and shoot him in self-defense, then he has no one to blame for that but himself. If you're gonna dish it out, you better be willing to take it, too.
Last edited: