• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Amazon Says Parler Systematically Unwilling To Remove Violent Content

Oh...so you think that random tweet I found is just "one tweet here or there"? I doubt that. I suspect there are THOUSANDS of similar tweets that twitter outright ignores and does nothing about.

And violence is NOT "baked into" the Parler business model. Freedom of speech for everyone is.

Lets assume there are 5000 such messages a day that get through the filter. Thats a pretty large number....until you realize that it amounts to .001% of all the messages sent on Twitter a day.

The same cant be said of Parler.

Stop acting like they are the same thing, and stop acting like threats of violence are covered by free speech. Its not.
 
And yet, Twitter refuses to remove violent content, as well.

shrug...

Since "violent content" is obviously not the problem, as shown by the hypocrisy, there has to be another reason. What do you think that reason might be?

A conspiracy to censor conservatives, of course. *L*
 

This, IMHO, highlights the key difference between Parler and Twitter. As Amazon points out, the violent content was part of Parler's business model while Twitter is more aimed at normal communications.
When will Twitter police their own house?
 

This, IMHO, highlights the key difference between Parler and Twitter. As Amazon points out, the violent content was part of Parler's business model while Twitter is more aimed at normal communications.
Yet Amazon is peddling extremely violent movies. Amazon even makes them, all part of Amazon's "business model." Thanks!!
 
Yet Amazon is peddling extremely violent movies. Amazon even makes them, all part of Amazon's "business model." Thanks!!
Yep, they can wipe Parlor in 24 hours but somehow can't get kiddy porn off the net
 
So what does a bad tweet on Twitter have to do with Parler’s reliance on AWS and their responsibility to conform to the AWS AUP.
Nothing.
 
Yet Amazon is peddling extremely violent movies. Amazon even makes them, all part of Amazon's "business model." Thanks!!
Lol, comparing death threats against politicians on social media to violent movies might be one of the most idiotic comparisons I've seen in a long time. Thanks for the laugh.
 
Lol, comparing death threats against politicians on social media to violent movies might be one of the most idiotic comparisons I've seen in a long time. Thanks for the laugh.
Then apparently you don't know much about the impact of violent movies and games on the development of young minds. Thanks!!
 
Yet Amazon is peddling extremely violent movies. Amazon even makes them, all part of Amazon's "business model." Thanks!!
That is quite a reach there, did you pull your shoulder?
 
So what does a bad tweet on Twitter have to do with Parler’s reliance on AWS and their responsibility to conform to the AWS AUP.
i'm pretty sure that Rush/Alex/Sean/Tucker/Fox/OAN/Newsmax don't make that distinction. hell, they're probably all still streaming about the inapplicable First Amendment.
 
And yet, Twitter refuses to remove violent content, as well.

shrug...

Since "violent content" is obviously not the problem, as shown by the hypocrisy, there has to be another reason. What do you think that reason might be?
First, you have to prove your assertion.
 
Twitter has let left wing incitement continue for years. Believe me, no "work on their algorithm" will change that.

And just because you repeat a lie (baked into their business model) over and over, that doesn't make your lie true.
I don't think anyone believes you on anything you write, as your posts are dripping intellectual dishonesty. From the "stolen election" false narrative, to the act of domestic terrorism carried out by far-right Trump supporters last Wednesday, nothing you post is believable.
Twitter polices its content, it owns its own servers and can do that. They take down things from both sides all the time, but the majority of the nonsense, the violent rhetoric, has been coming more and more from right-wing sources. This is why they had to make Parler and use it. It isn't "freedom of speech", they needed an echo-chamber to scream their aggression and violence. If Parler doesn't want to police that, that's on them, they don't have to. But they don't own their own servers or anything like that, they have to use someone else's, and those that own those servers are allowed to police the content that is on it. So Parler got kicked off because it refused to remove violent content. That's all.
 
Oh...so you think that random tweet I found is just "one tweet here or there"? I doubt that. I suspect there are THOUSANDS of similar tweets that twitter outright ignores and does nothing about.

And violence is NOT "baked into" the Parler business model. Freedom of speech for everyone is.
Come back when you have more than “suspicions”.
 
 
What does twitter have to do with the case between Parler and AWS?
 
What does twitter have to do with the case between Parler and AWS?
something something social media something conservatives can't act with impunity and are mad about it something something random posts.
 
something something social media something conservatives can't act with impunity and are mad about it something something random posts.

Here is how the hearing today started..

With Parler’s very existence on the line, its lawyer began with a startling admission to a Seattle federal judge that he’s not on social media and has been trying to quickly get up to speed on the technology.

Here is how it ended..

Rothstein repeatedly pressed Groesbeck to explain the emergency warranting an immediate court order, and why she shouldn’t go through a longer, more deliberative process to reach a permanent resolution of Parler’s dispute with Amazon. The lawyer ultimately acknowledged the slower approach is the “better avenue.”

 
Back
Top Bottom