SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
"Hush child! Free speech is the reason you grew up without a grandma or your mommy or daddy! They all went to the Utah camps for demonstrating against the Democrat Party!"
https://twitter.com/Julio_Rosas11/status/1520790249957429248?
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/apr/28/dhs-created-disinformation-governance-team-police-/
https://ijr.com/dhs-dismisses-concerns-disinformation-board-leader/
Geeez, people, too bad we didn't have a disinformation board in the McCarthy days, huh? All those commies and socialists could have been put into concentration camps. Those radical black activists could have joined them. All the gay activists, a bunch of feminists, the free sex cultist hippies, and all the druggies. Don't forget the illegal aliens!!
(Score: 3, Insightful) by khallow on Monday May 02 2022, @04:54PM (21 children)
Now (May 1, 2022, from your first link):
"Not on our platforms"! Right?
That should be a lesson to us all. It didn't even take a year for this guy to sing a completely different tune - from smugly bragging that Trump had been kicked off Twitter and mocking Trump for alleged concerns about freedom of speech being under assault to "we are headed to hell" (and whining that Trump somehow did it). Notice also that he repeatedly conflates regulation with control - with the emphasis on control. For example, in the above video quote, it actually starts "You need controls on this. You need regulation. [...]"
Once again, we have a journalist backing censorship without consideration of who will be in charge of that censorship and that's after getting bit by karma. And his reasons are vague stuff like Russian propaganda in 2016, Musk's dislike of the SEC, and that Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg want to make money. One of the dumbest things I've ever seen.
As an aside, it will be interesting to see if the Biden administration throws any roadblocks up for this buyout. Maybe we'll get to see what some of the present day control can really do.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 02 2022, @08:56PM (10 children)
Hmm, someone accuses Runaway of bad faith, and immediately khallow shows up? Coincidence, or an obvious confirmation?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 02 2022, @09:54PM
Unconfirmed confirmational coincidence.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 02 2022, @10:19PM (8 children)
Tjey are limely the same person. Their disagreements are basically walls of text spewing rightwing talking points, just more trolling by a shameless sock puopeting propagandist. Khalliw disagrees with Runaway just enough to seem plausible, but never on anything important.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday May 02 2022, @10:58PM
Because there'd be no reason to agree with Runaway on something like the Zurawik drama? As to disagreeing on important things, I disagree with him on both the Ukraine and covid policy. If those aren't important, then maybe it's not interesting or relevant at all what we agree or disagree on.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Monday May 02 2022, @11:23PM (6 children)
There is a real problem here. Zurawik isn't the only authoritative Chicken Little advocating ending US freedom of speech. But Runaway did us a great service by finding someone so blindingly hypocritical about it. I wonder if the rest of my list of problems above have done the same about face, gloating when it was Trump subject to their whims and whining when the tables turned with Musk's buyout.
(Score: 0, Troll) by Puffin on Tuesday May 03 2022, @02:31AM (5 children)
That's very nice, khallow. What "whims" are you talking about?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday May 04 2022, @06:18AM (4 children)
Let's see...
David Zurawik on CNN in Runaway's linked story. Jack Goldsmith and Andrew Keane Woods in The Atlantic in my first link. Andrew Marantz in New York Times in my second link. Richard Stengel in the Washington Post in my third link.
(Score: 1) by Puffin on Wednesday May 04 2022, @07:52AM (3 children)
But, what "whims"? Seems like those Gentlemen are grounding their positions on fairly substantial legal principles, and not at all on the whims of fickle partisan opinion, like you are, khallow. So, what whims are you complaining about? I ask again.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday May 04 2022, @12:54PM (1 child)
Like what? I'm not going to bother reading through what I've already written on the matter - which honestly already rebuts your assertion, but what would you be referring to that I've somehow missed for years?
On the present case, Zurawik's outburst during the CNN show above, he cites no such substantial legal principle. It was just Musk and Zuckerberg are here to make money - not serve whatever higher cause he implied needed serving, Trump is bad, and Russians wouldn't have been able to steal the 2016 election for Trump, if it weren't for Zuckerberg taking his Ruble payments. And then made an empty appeal that we needed controls on this without specifying what form that would take.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 07 2022, @08:27AM
Finally! Something I can wholefartedly agree with khallow on! I, as well, will not bother reading through what you have posted, in the past, or in the future. Better for all concerned.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday May 04 2022, @12:57PM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 02 2022, @10:47PM
All’s well that’s Orwell
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 2, 2022
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 03 2022, @04:19AM (8 children)
Looks like the same tune. Earlier quote is pointing out how his free speech isn't being censored precisely because they have the right to remove information and do whatever they want on their platform, and by extension Trump doesn't have the right to post there. Second quote is pointing out that the people who own the platform can control whatever information appears on that platform. Since you went through his Baltimore Sun articles, you should have noticed a number of articles saying the same thing for years about social media and the internet needing regulation. But I can see why you left those out since they don't fit your narrative about his having a change of heart in the past year.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 03 2022, @11:56AM
I re-read the quotes, sir. No sir, second does not seem to say that, sir. Nice try though, sir. MSM editorials are always self-contradictory shit, sir.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday May 04 2022, @06:26AM (6 children)
Nope. In the second quote, he is calling to put "controls" on the people who own the platform. In the CNN spot, he's ranting about Musk and Zuckerberg, not Trump. "These guys" refers to them.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 04 2022, @09:03PM (5 children)
Fail to see the disagreement about ownership and the situation with a lack of regulation. You do you though.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday May 05 2022, @12:06AM (4 children)
He did too, I suppose. The cognitive dissonance is in arguing against regulation of these platforms when it was Trump being suppressed (the owners were merely exercising their rights) and arguing for regulation of the same when the new owner would likely reverse that decision.
In other words, actions that Zurawik agrees with are merely exercise of owners' rights - "Not on our platform!" Actions that Zurawik disagrees with are "You need controls on this."
It's a typical authoritarian pathology. The big missing key to understanding why it fails is that Zurawik won't be in charge. He won't be controlling the bad things he worries about.
What happens when another Trump gets elected and puts their mangy paws on the levers of control for the social media giants? It's not like we've forever lost our ability to elect creepy or criminal presidents, right? Then Zurawik is the voice in the wilderness complaining about free speech and owners' rights. Who knows we might even be able to read that stuff if we're sneaky about it and someone passes us a link.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 05 2022, @02:11AM (3 children)
If only you spent more time reading his articles instead of mining them. Of all the greatness that could have been.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday May 05 2022, @04:35AM (2 children)
What would be the point? As I suspected would happen, I caught Zurawik in a state of pure hypocrisy, indicating that he has pathological understanding of this subject. I would no more read him for free speech issues than I would for general relativity. Plus half his stuff is paywalled.
Life is too short to read sources that have demonstrated fundamental ignorance and lack of credibility. Move on and find someone more useful.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 05 2022, @08:29AM (1 child)
On that we agree. If only the irony weren't so rich.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 07 2022, @08:33AM
Irony for khallow is like metaphor for Drax the Destroyer, it flies right over his head. As khallow says:
Khallow don't know what khallow don't know, which means what he do know, exists in a tiny bubble of obvious rebuttal and mutually reinforcing ideological daisy chaining. Don't pull out, khallow!