Main Menu |
Most Favorited Images |
Recently Uploaded Images |
Most Liked Images |
Top Reviewers |
cockalatte |
649 |
MoneyManMatt |
490 |
Still Looking |
399 |
samcruz |
399 |
Jon Bon |
397 |
Harley Diablo |
377 |
honest_abe |
362 |
DFW_Ladies_Man |
313 |
Chung Tran |
288 |
lupegarland |
287 |
nicemusic |
285 |
You&Me |
281 |
Starscream66 |
280 |
George Spelvin |
267 |
sharkman29 |
256 |
|
Top Posters |
DallasRain | 70798 | biomed1 | 63382 | Yssup Rider | 61074 | gman44 | 53297 | LexusLover | 51038 | offshoredrilling | 48700 | WTF | 48267 | pyramider | 46370 | bambino | 42867 | The_Waco_Kid | 37225 | CryptKicker | 37224 | Mokoa | 36496 | Chung Tran | 36100 | Still Looking | 35944 | Mojojo | 33117 |
|
|
07-07-2021, 02:27 PM
|
#1
|
Premium Access
Join Date: Feb 27, 2010
Location: houston
Posts: 10,408
|
go for it Donald
Here is a better explanation of the lawsuit than just a link.
Former President Donald Trump sued Facebook Inc., Twitter Inc., Alphabet Inc.’s Google and their chief executives.
During his presidency, Trump used Twitter for everything from insulting rivals to major policy announcements, and he relied on Facebook especially to raise money from small-dollar donors.
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
07-07-2021, 02:32 PM
|
#2
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: Jun 5, 2017
Location: austin
Posts: 22,775
|
Easy to see you only included about a third of the story!
Especially the part of suppression of speech
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
07-07-2021, 02:46 PM
|
#3
|
Premium Access
Join Date: Mar 29, 2010
Location: mo
Posts: 1,550
|
This might be fun. Should a privately owned newspaper (yeah,old school) be required to publish every letter to the editor?
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
07-07-2021, 03:02 PM
|
#4
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: Jun 5, 2017
Location: austin
Posts: 22,775
|
What kinda question is that? No point can be made!
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
07-07-2021, 03:23 PM
|
#5
|
Premium Access
Join Date: Mar 16, 2016
Location: Steel City
Posts: 7,989
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by reddog1951
This might be fun. Should a privately owned newspaper (yeah,old school) be required to publish every letter to the editor?
|
That’s kinda crazy, obviously a newspaper has only so much space. It’s apples to oranges too, since Facebook and Twitter present themselves as neutral platforms, not publishers, which gives them certain legal protections.
The quashing of the Hunter laptop story was them finally admitting their blatant bias IMO. Everything about it was legitimate and they censored it anyways.
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
07-07-2021, 03:40 PM
|
#6
|
Premium Access
Join Date: Mar 29, 2010
Location: mo
Posts: 1,550
|
Not sure it's crazy, since a lot of law (and I'm not a lawyer) is based on precedent and new platforms are sometimes not a good fit. We all know that certain newspapers and other media have certain "leanings". Hence the "equal time" ruling by the FCC. I'll admit to being a "shit-stirrer", so expand this argument out...should Fox then be required to give equal time to Kamala Harris?
Freedom of the press is a double edged sword. I think the original intent was freedom from a government press and licensure for contradictory views....if you have a press.
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
07-07-2021, 03:55 PM
|
#7
|
Account Disabled
Join Date: Jan 20, 2010
Location: Houston
Posts: 14,460
|
President Trump, your rent free room is ready!
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
07-07-2021, 04:04 PM
|
#8
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: Jan 16, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 51,038
|
He has a good choice of rentals as far as numbers go, although some of the vacancies have been over used and are rather shabby for lack of repair.
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
07-07-2021, 04:49 PM
|
#9
|
Lifetime Premium Access
Join Date: Nov 16, 2013
Location: Baton Rouge
Posts: 6,091
|
Fox best be careful. They will not be able to exclude advertisements they don’t like, which they have done a couple of times because it was “agitating” to their watchers for an ad to talk about trump lying or seeing capital police beaten.
|
|
Quote
| 2 users liked this post
|
07-07-2021, 05:02 PM
|
#10
|
AKA President Trump
Join Date: Jan 8, 2010
Location: The MAGA Zone
Posts: 37,225
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1blackman1
Fox best be careful. They will not be able to exclude advertisements they don’t like, which they have done a couple of times because it was “agitating” to their watchers for an ad to talk about trump lying or seeing capital police beaten.
|
is that your expert legal opinion? FOX can accept or decline any advertiser they want. so can CNN or MSNBC.
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
07-07-2021, 05:24 PM
|
#11
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: Dec 31, 2009
Location: dallas
Posts: 23,345
|
1b1- What should Fox news 'be careful of" - DPST fascist government shut down? - as Your party has repeatedly advocated for One america News and fox - yet lets the russia lies and other misbehavior of the LSM go without criticism - because it fits your and DPST narrative????
easy - the left loves to shut down any different opinion from the marxit DPST fascist narrative POV!
or - is that now from the Xinn and LSM - that 'cancel culture' is just as 'Defund the Police" - a creation and advocacy of teh conservatives????
that would be typical of the LSM and fascist DPST party.
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
07-07-2021, 05:32 PM
|
#12
|
Premium Access
Join Date: Mar 29, 2010
Location: mo
Posts: 1,550
|
Just saying, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Be careful what you wish for lest you get goosed.
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
07-07-2021, 05:50 PM
|
#13
|
Premium Access
Join Date: Mar 16, 2016
Location: Steel City
Posts: 7,989
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by reddog1951
Not sure it's crazy, since a lot of law (and I'm not a lawyer) is based on precedent and new platforms are sometimes not a good fit. We all know that certain newspapers and other media have certain "leanings". Hence the "equal time" ruling by the FCC. I'll admit to being a "shit-stirrer", so expand this argument out...should Fox then be required to give equal time to Kamala Harris?
|
I don’t quite get that section 230 stuff either, or how it applies to social media. I guess we’re gonna find out.
I don’t think Fox should be required, but it’d be a good idea if they did.
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
07-07-2021, 05:53 PM
|
#14
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: Dec 31, 2009
Location: dallas
Posts: 23,345
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by reddog1951
Not sure it's crazy, since a lot of law (and I'm not a lawyer) is based on precedent and new platforms are sometimes not a good fit. We all know that certain newspapers and other media have certain "leanings". Hence the "equal time" ruling by the FCC. I'll admit to being a "shit-stirrer", so expand this argument out...should Fox then be required to give equal time to Kamala Harris?
Freedom of the press is a double edged sword. I think the original intent was freedom from a government press and licensure for contradictory views....if you have a press.
|
Equal time to Kamala harris - what has she even spoken or written since becoming VP - other than as 'Lady Haw Haw"!
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
07-07-2021, 05:57 PM
|
#15
|
Account Frozen
Join Date: Aug 8, 2020
Location: Ding Dong
Posts: 3,593
|
Good to see people championing censorship, because private business.
Of course, a media business should be allowed to silence whoever they want at any time. They should be able to control what kind of information people get by censoring what they don't want them to see. That sounds like a completely normal thing to do.
I totally agree. More power to them.
O yea and TRUMPF FARTED LOL
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|
|
AMPReviews.net |
Find Ladies |
Hot Women |
|