monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

@Builder,

Builder wrote:

Actually, these orgs are in clear breach of the First Amendment,

Really? When did it change that the First Amendment only protects against the government censorship?

I'd thought that private sector entities have no First Amendment obligation to protect the freedom of speech.
You will know better.

Nevertheless, there's still Dlive, where rioters broadcasted from the Capitol, and which is now benefiting from the growing exodus of right-wing users from Twitter, Facebook and YouTube.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Quote:

When did it change that the First Amendment only protects against the government censorship?

Cherry-picking is your strong suit, Walter.

Twitter and facebook aren't government entities.

2 Replies

@Builder,

Builder wrote:

Twitter and facebook aren't government entities.

Yes, that's what I meant.

1 Reply

@Builder,

Builder wrote:

Actually, these orgs are in clear breach of the First Amendment

These orgs, though without oath, still have the duty to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. Trump's incitement has led to pro-Trump mob’s storming of Congress - the interpreter of the Constitution who has All legislative Powers.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Quote:

Yes, that's what I meant.

There will be a backlash of course, and Pelosi and co prefer to work in an echo chamber.

It helps with their early onset dementia.

0 Replies

@oristarA,

Quote:

These orgs, though without oath, still have the duty to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

They can twist their own descriptors of what their business model is, but if they're disseminating news and current affairs, then yes, they need to abide by models of decency and the freedom of speech legislation.

1 Reply

@Builder,

The First Amendment was designed to prevent Congress or the states from blocking people’s freedom to express themselves.
The government can’t push a private company to publish something it doesn’t want to publish.
Twitter et.al. are platforms that can regulate content as they wish, in accordance with their own terms of service.

2 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Quote:

Twitter et.al. are platforms that can regulate content as they wish, in accordance with their own terms of service.

How did they end up in front of a senate inquiry, Walter? Political bias much?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2020/nov/18/facebook-and-twitter-ceos-face-senate-hearing-over-handling-of-2020-us-election-video

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Builder its very confused, he things Magazines and social media outlets are forced to publish everything that is sent to them. Perhaps that's true in Australia (I bet it's not). The 1st amendment prevents the Government from denying citizens the right to free express and prevents censorship of the press (but Walter already know that, even though builder doesn't)

2 Replies

@Builder,

Builder wrote:

How did they end up in front of a senate inquiry, Walter? Political bias much?

That was a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing.
Both companies assured the committee that they had programs in place to prevent misinformation.

0 Replies

@glitterbag,

glitterbag wrote:

Perhaps that's true in Australia (I bet it's not).

Actually, the Australian Constitution even does not explicitly protect freedom of expression.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Quote:

The Australian Constitution does not explicitly protect freedom of expression. However, the High Court has held that an implied freedom of political communication exists as an indispensible part of the system of representative and responsible government created by the Constitution.

Walter, the current situation here with the despised "conservative" government, is that they've gained total control over our "federal" police force, using them as attack dogs on the "press", which is largely controlled by ex-pat Aussie Rupert Mudrock.

Even the "opposition" party is afraid to call them out on anything important, preferring to snipe from the sidelines on trivial affairs, so we're about in the same boat as the yanks in that respect.

2 Replies

@Builder,

The Federal Police can only 'attack' when press they publish government secrets. Not that I agree with the Federal Police being used this way - I don't at all. It is incredibly undemocratic, and the hallmarks of a government that is becoming more corrupt.

1 Reply

@Builder,

All that doesn't and hadn't changed your constitution.

0 Replies

@vikorr,

Quote:

The Federal Police can only 'attack' when press they publish government secrets

The AFP has twice been sent to "sort out" unions, without positive results, to ransack the offices of ABC reporters, again, without finding anything to do with "govt secrets". Have you been living under a rock, lately, vikorr?

This isn't last century "stuff". It's under Scroto's "watch" for want of a better descriptor.

1 Reply

0 Replies

@Builder,

Quote:

The AFP has twice been sent to "sort out" unions, without positive results

Mate, you were talking specifically about attacks on press. If you want to expand the conversation to dealings with Unions that's fine, but don't pretend others are ignorant of other issues just because because you want to spring a surprise expansion of your own raised topic on them.

You have a legitimate complaint in the attacks on the press.

0 Replies

Because of the historic nature of the Capitol riot, the mob not only destroyed historically important artifacts but created them: Frank Blazich, a curator from the National Museum of American History, collected signs and other ephemera from the scene.
Other leavings, including pro-insurrection stickers and flags found inside the Capitol, will be preserved along with artifacts like the speaker’s damaged name plate in the House and Senate collections and shared with national museums, including the Smithsonians, said the Committee on House Administration spokesperson.
More @ WP: The Capitol mob desecrated a historical workplace — and left behind some disturbing artifacts

0 Replies

@glitterbag,

He thinks Kangaroo Jack is the prime minister.

0 Replies

Jim Bourg, a Reuters news pictures editor who was at the Capitol on January 6, tweeted that he heard at least three rioters say they "hoped to find Vice President Mike Pence and execute him by hanging him from a Capitol Hill tree as a traitor". (Trump had negatively tweeted about Pence just prior to the riots, saying he lacked the "courage" to overturn the election.)

Pictures have emerged of one of the rioters in military gear carrying flex cuffs, suggesting he was planning to take prisoners.

(Photo via Win McNamee/Getty Images)

2 Replies

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know