The "All Things Politics" Thread (please review page 1)

[Brill]

uh, ok, go to your own echo chamber, then, and get off Twitter. You’ll have 1/100th of the users, and no one will actually leave Twitter, but there you go. Way to defeat your own argument, dumbasses.

So? If the Libs have Twitter and Boomers have Parler, what’s the problem? There’s not a lot of sympathy on either side in this thread about the SCOTUS ruling.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1331837982433812480

Separately, if RBG were still alive, Americans ability to be free to exercise their religion as they see fit, would have been limited. The Puritans came here for that very reason.

 

[ThunderHorse]

The only thing the move to Parler (and the like) does is undermine the actual legal battle, in favor of Twitter.

The whinge from the right has always been “ItS a UtIlItY yOu HaVe tO bEhAvE lIkE a PlAtFoRm”. In order for that to be true, though, you have to prove that Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and YouTube were so big that they were effectively monopolies because they’re the only real option.

Well, the right- in their ever amazing ability to be boomers and completely misunderstand the zeitgeist- cut the legs off their only argument to rescind or adjust 230.

Now the argument is, “TWOTTER WONT OET ME POST MY CONSPIRACY THEORIES!!!”

uh, ok, go to your own echo chamber, then, and get off Twitter. You’ll have 1/100th of the users, and no one will actually leave Twitter, but there you go. Way to defeat your own argument, dumbasses.

Generally speaking just because someone creates a minority platform doesn't stop the monopoly argument in court or in Congress. But I can tell you working in in the Experiential Entertainment Industry that if you don't have social media and effective social managers you're going nowhere fast. But it's not just that industry that is wholly reliant on social media, because we're so connected on our phones (think mobile first), almost every human interaction service needs social media channels.

Just look at the One's Ready podcast and how you use social media to extend and grow the show etc. If you didn't have social media attached to it your reach would be much smaller.

 

[Marauder06]

Semi-serious question

Does Trump have the legal authority to give “himself” a preemptive pardon?

As far as I know, yes. Let me see if I can find the article that explains it.

 

[amlove21]

So? If the Libs have Twitter and Boomers have Parler, what’s the problem? There’s not a lot of sympathy on either side in this thread about the SCOTUS ruling.

Yeah- exactly. So now, no more talk about being censored, then. There is a space for this, so stop crying about it, everyone. We agree. Parler is an acceptable alternative, no monopoly, and it's definitely not a publisher, so Twitter and FB and Insta can censor whatever they want, and if you don't like Twitter, use Parler.

Generally speaking just because someone creates a minority platform doesn't stop the monopoly argument in court or in Congress. But I can tell you working in in the Experiential Entertainment Industry that if you don't have social media and effective social managers you're going nowhere fast. But it's not just that industry that is wholly reliant on social media, because we're so connected on our phones (think mobile first), almost every human interaction service needs social media channels.

Just look at the One's Ready podcast and how you use social media to extend and grow the show etc. If you didn't have social media attached to it your reach would be much smaller.

But it's not a minority platform. It's been the #1 (or close) trending app on the App Store for more than a month? And is there a monopoly conversation in Congress I am not aware of?

 

[ThunderHorse]

But it's not a minority platform. It's been the #1 (or close) trending app on the App Store for more than a month? And is there a monopoly conversation in Congress I am not aware of?

It's been going on in Congress for some time. Which is why the discussion of regulating Social Media like a utility exists.

Here's a bunch of sources, the NPR link also has the House Report. Also, remember the House is controlled by the Democrats, so the Republicans aren't the only ones pissed here.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/06/hou...facebook-monopoly-buys-kills-competitors.html

How Are Apple, Amazon, Facebook, Google Monopolies? House Report Counts The Ways

House: Amazon, Facebook, Apple, Google have “monopoly power,” should be split

Facebook's 'monopoly power' hurts user privacy, finds Congress

 

[amlove21]

It's been going on in Congress for some time. Which is why the discussion of regulating Social Media like a utility exists.

Here's a bunch of sources, the NPR link also has the House Report. Also, remember the House is controlled by the Democrats, so the Republicans aren't the only ones pissed here.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/06/hou...facebook-monopoly-buys-kills-competitors.html

How Are Apple, Amazon, Facebook, Google Monopolies? House Report Counts The Ways

House: Amazon, Facebook, Apple, Google have “monopoly power,” should be split

Facebook's 'monopoly power' hurts user privacy, finds Congress

Yeah, so, conversation over, right? Parler is currently #3. That's not a minority app. That's a worldwide phenomenon. Dan Bongino agrees.

Parler just refuted all your links, and the other platforms will continue to do so.

Pretty clearly, no monopoly, so no need to work in 230 as part of your complaints. They're all platforms, not publishers, and no utility clause needs to be granted either, right? Because of the highly popular and FREE and available alternatives.

Twitter sucks, Facebook sucks, Instagram sucks. So, get off of them. Easy.

 

[ThunderHorse]

Yeah, so, conversation over, right? Parler is currently #3. That's not a minority app. That's a worldwide phenomenon. Dan Bongino agrees.

Parler just refuted all your links, and the other platforms will continue to do so.

Pretty clearly, no monopoly, so no need to work in 230 as part of your complaints. They're all platforms, not publishers, and no utility clause needs to be granted either, right? Because of the highly popular and FREE and available alternatives.

Twitter sucks, Facebook sucks, Instagram sucks. So, get off of them. Easy.

I'm guessing since you didn't put an emoji in there that you're being serious. Just because Parler exists and is trending for the last 10 minutes is meaningless to the discussion of whether or not you regulated Social Media Itself (all of them) as utilities.

It is literally impossible to have a front street facing business without social media and succeed in today's marketplace.

 

[Ooh-Rah]

It is literally impossible to have a front street facing business without social media and succeed in today's marketplace.

I disagree. Unique destination stores (cigar, fine liquor, etc) do not need social media.

 

[Locksteady]

It is literally impossible to have a front street facing business without social media and succeed in today's marketplace.

How is this relevant to your point if the business tool you're targeting (social media) doesn't have a monopoly platform?

 

[ThunderHorse]

How is this relevant to your point if the business tool you're targeting (social media) doesn't have a monopolizing platform?

The precedents set by the US Government on what is and what is not a monopoly are pretty clear. Just because a minuscule competitor exists doesn't stop Twitter/Facebook/Instagram from having a monopoly in the marketplace.

That doesn't mean they need to be broken up either, it just means that they get greater oversight and regulation.

 

[amlove21]

How is this relevant to your point if the business tool you're targeting (social media) doesn't have a monopoly platform?

It’s not. It’s accurate, just not relevant.

I'm guessing since you didn't put an emoji in there that you're being serious. Just because Parler exists and is trending for the last 10 minutes is meaningless to the discussion of whether or not you regulated Social Media Itself (all of them) as utilities.

It is literally impossible to have a front street facing business without social media and succeed in today's marketplace.

Disagree, for the second paragraph. Nothing is literally impossible, certainly not what you wrote. Since you didn’t put an emoji I assumed you’re completely literal.

The precedents set by the US Government on what is and what is not a monopoly are pretty clear. Just because a minuscule competitor exists doesn't stop Twitter/Facebook/Instagram from having a monopoly in the marketplace.

That doesn't mean they need to be broken up either, it just means that they get greater oversight and regulation.

Wild. A conservative calling for more government oversight and regulation of a private business, because they don’t like the way that business operates. Isn’t that what the socialist left does?

 

[ThunderHorse]

Disagree, for the second paragraph. Nothing is literally impossible, certainly not what you wrote. Since you didn’t put an emoji I assumed you’re completely literal.

Hyperbole, but not sarcastic.

I disagree. Unique destination stores (cigar, fine liquor, etc) do not need social media.

Well if you come to PHX I'll take you to all the Cigar spots that have social media .

 

[amlove21]

Hyperbole, but not sarcastic.

ok.

 

[Brill]

Americans are a funny lot.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1332011102389977089

 

[Brill]

Yeah- exactly. So now, no more talk about being censored, then. There is a space for this, so stop crying about it, everyone. We agree. Parler is an acceptable alternative, no monopoly, and it's definitely not a publisher, so Twitter and FB and Insta can censor whatever they want, and if you don't like Twitter, use Parler.


But it's not a minority platform. It's been the #1 (or close) trending app on the App Store for more than a month? And is there a monopoly conversation in Congress I am not aware of?

I‘ve not heard references to monopoly and curious how it was interjected into the matter since it’s irrelevant. Congress seems concerned that the law may need tweaking since the publisher/not publisher notion is not settled.

While the hearing’s title focused on Section 230 of the Communications Act, which provides social media platforms with broad immunity for third-party content posted on their platforms, as well as immunity for platform policies that remove or moderate posted content, Members of the Committee also raised issues concerning privacy and the competitive impact on local journalism.

Proponents of Section 230 contend that the law is the foundation of free speech on the Internet. However, in recent years, both Republican and Democratic Members of Congress have been critical of social media platforms and their legally protected content moderation policies – but for different reasons. Many Republicans contend that social media platforms have abused their discretion afforded under the law and are biased against conservative view points, while Democrats have been critical of these same platforms for not sufficiently combatting the spread of hate speech and misinformation, particularly with regard to public health and elections.

Twitter, Facebook, Google Heads Testify on Section 230 and Local Journalism

 

[Locksteady]

The precedents set by the US Government on what is and what is not a monopoly are pretty clear. Just because a minuscule competitor exists doesn't stop Twitter/Facebook/Instagram from having a monopoly in the marketplace.

According to the very authority to which you are appealing to make your argument, none of those social media platforms qualify:

Courts do not require a literal monopoly before applying rules for single firm conduct; that term is used as shorthand for a firm with significant and durable market power — that is, the long term ability to raise price or exclude competitors. That is how that term is used here: a "monopolist" is a firm with significant and durable market power. Courts look at the firm's market share, but typically do not find monopoly power if the firm (or a group of firms acting in concert) has less than 50 percent of the sales of a particular product or service within a certain geographic area. Some courts have required much higher percentages. In addition, that leading position must be sustainable over time: if competitive forces or the entry of new firms could discipline the conduct of the leading firm, courts are unlikely to find that the firm has lasting market power.

Monopolization Defined

 

[GOTWA]

The precedents set by the US Government on what is and what is not a monopoly are pretty clear. Just because a minuscule competitor exists doesn't stop Twitter/Facebook/Instagram from having a monopoly in the marketplace.

In simpler terms, would you be saying that even though competition exists, big tech is too established for others to be successful?

 

[amlove21]

I‘ve not heard references to monopoly and curious how it was interjected into the matter since it’s irrelevant. Congress seems concerned that the law may need tweaking since the publisher/not publisher notion is not settled.



Twitter, Facebook, Google Heads Testify on Section 230 and Local Journalism

That’s because the nuanced argument to 230 is the one you don’t understand. Or, thats my perception. Because it appears that you don’t.

To apply the “platform vs publisher” argument to FANG, you’ll need to prove that they’re a monopoly, like a specific cable or electricity provider. For instance, an electrical provider in your area (publisher) shouldn’t be able to deny your access because of your political views. E.g., “Prime power rejects your access to electricity because of your political views, which we support because of your access to electricity.”

Unless you can prove a monopoly- in this case you can’t thanks to Parler- you can’t really make the case that you’re being maligned and there isn’t another option.

don’t like Twitter? Easy. Go to Parler. Don’t like YouTube? Simple. Go to rumble.

These new platforms support 230. It actually makes 230’s case stronger.

ETA- There are options, not a monopoly. Go cry in your echo chamber to your millions of friends.

 

[ThunderHorse]

In simpler terms, would you be saying that even though competition exists, big tech is too established for others to be successful?

That would be a good summation generally.

 

[GOTWA]

@amlove21 needs a hug today more than ever. Strong responses for a Thanksgiving holiday.