Censor Rogan!

Well, you can't say she hasn't got a point. We've long since accepted a certain degree of censorship, broadly defined, of the peddlers of snake-oil remedies.
 
He said mechanisms should be in place to stop the spread of misinformation. He never says anything about what actions should be taken towards Rogan.

In fact, he calls upon the public more than anything else, to take action. and again, he does not specify what action that is.

"It's up to each individual to be thoughtful in what they are sharing"

Don't hear any call for censor there.
 
Well, you can't say she hasn't got a point. We've long since accepted a certain degree of censorship, broadly defined, of the peddlers of snake-oil remedies.

Malone and McCullough weren't selling anything. They just had a different opinion. That used to be allowed in America. But not in Joey Mushbrain's America, apparently.
 
He said mechanisms should be in place to stop the spread of misinformation. He never says anything about what actions should be taken towards Rogan.

In fact, he calls upon the public more than anything else, to take action. and again, he does not specify what action that is.

"It's up to each individual to be thoughtful in what they are sharing"

Don't hear any call for censor there.

"Now when it comes to how we root out the misinformation in society right now, and give people access to accurate information, we've got to do several things. Number one, we've got to recognize that our technology platforms, whether particularly social media, these have an important role to play. These are the predominant places where we're seeing misinformation spread,"

Gee, what could these outfits do to stem the flow of information not approved of by the Central State?
 
I did. It was as worthless as your response.

Youtube removed the video in question, which you could certainly characterize as censorship.....obviously he was talking about other actions that would provide accurate information to the public in spite of opposing discussion.
 
Youtube removed the video in question, which you could certainly characterize as censorship.....obviously he was talking about other actions that would provide accurate information to the public in spite of opposing discussion.

Censoring per the urging of the Central State. That just fills me with hope for the future that we will have a Ministry of Truth telling us how it is.
 
Censoring per the urging of the Central State. That just fills me with hope for the future that we will have a Ministry of Truth telling us how it is.

Providing opposing information is not censorship.
 
Pulling down opposing views at the behest of the government is, you pathetic lickspittle.

Well,
1. He never mentioned that anything should be taken down in his statements
2. There's no evidence that youtube's actions were the result of any government request
 
Well,
1. He never mentioned that anything should be taken down in his statements
2. There's no evidence that youtube's actions were the result of any government request

He's echoing the rest of the Democrat Party, which is shrieking at social media monopolists to ramp up the censorship...or else.

Courts recognize this hint-hint, nice company, it'd be a shame if sumpin' happened to it approach favored by organized crime and Demicrats, and have put an end to it before. I see them acting similarly soon here.
 
He's echoing the rest of the Democrat Party, which is shrieking at social media monopolists to ramp up the censorship...or else.

Courts recognize this hint-hint, nice company, it'd be a shame if sumpin' happened to it approach favored by organized crime and Demicrats, and have put an end to it before. I see them acting similarly soon here.

This isn't what you claimed. and he's saying that accurate information needs to get to the public to combat misinformation and that tech isn't doing enough in this respect.

Whether you heard what he said or heard what you think he said is certainly your prerogative
 
This isn't what you claimed.

Of course it is. It's the shot across the bow, the dead dog on the doorstep. Poor federal fovernment can't seem to get people to trust it due to its myriad lies and 180's, so they're trying to shut down speech from heterodox voices.

And bootlickers like you cheer it on.
 
He's echoing the rest of the Democrat Party, which is shrieking at social media monopolists to ramp up the censorship...or else.

Courts recognize this hint-hint, nice company, it'd be a shame if sumpin' happened to it approach favored by organized crime and Demicrats, and have put an end to it before. I see them acting similarly soon here.

No they haven’t.
 
Of course it is. It's the shot across the bow, the dead dog on the doorstep. Poor federal fovernment can't seem to get people to trust it due to its myriad lies and 180's, so they're trying to shut down speech from heterodox voices.

And bootlickers like you cheer it on.

I am favorable to getting accurate information to everyone.
 
Of course it is. It's the shot across the bow, the dead dog on the doorstep. Poor federal fovernment can't seem to get people to trust it due to its myriad lies and 180's, so they're trying to shut down speech from heterodox voices.

And bootlickers like you cheer it on.

This seems to be upsetting you quite a bit, friendo.

Instead of making useless dirges here and getting burst blood vessels in return, why don't you take action against this process the same way you fearlessly defeated the forces of CRT?
 
What if Rogan's guests are right and Spotify has pulled those podcasts at the urging of Democrats?

You can file an FOIA and retrieve all communications to spotify with government officials...maybe that will give you something to go off of rather than just believing people you've only heard of because of rogan.
 
You can file an FOIA and retrieve all communications to spotify with government officials...maybe that will give you something to go off of rather than just believing people you've only heard of because of rogan.

Who needs FOIA? They're doing it right in the open on MSNBC.
 
Back
Top