- Joined
- Jan 2, 2006
- Messages
- 29,265
- Reaction score
- 15,483
- Location
- Boca
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
And here, Twitter follows our laws. Notice the lack of force in this distinction....
In Germany we dont allow private companies to dictate us. Twitter is forced here to follow our laws.
Twitter is following U.S. law.In Germany we dont allow private companies to dictate us. Twitter is forced here to follow our laws.
No, but you do describe the Democratic Party's view that corporate monopolies should have complete regulatory authoritarian power to prohibit free speech, not the government. In the EU, the government decides what speech is dangerous, not rich white male mega billionaires as most Democrats demand for the USA.
Merkel is Trumps main antagonist on the international stage for the last 4 years, so nobody can suspect her to just side with him for any sympathy.
https://www.ft.com/content/6146b352-6b40-48ef-b10b-a34ad585b91a
Angela Merkel, German chancellor, has sharply criticised Twitter’s decision to ban US president Donald Trump, calling it a “problematic” breach of the “fundamental right to free speech”.
In Germany we dont allow private companies to dictate us. Twitter is forced here to follow our laws.
Methinks, with all due respect, that you've somewhat missed the point she was making.Merkel does know that his freedom of speech has not been violated, only his use of the Twitter page has been removed. Twitter is a private company with rules and regulations. Her own party would also kick people out if they broke the rules of her party.
Private businesses have the right to makes rules regarding their services. If you take out a page on a web page provider in Germany and you are a holocaust denier then the provider has the freedom to kick them out for violating their rules. I think Merkel is involving herself in things that are not her business. She is not owner of Twitter and I think she has no recourse to question the company rules of Twitter regarding unacceptable tweets.
Methinks, with all due respect, that you've somewhat missed the point she was making.
This is actually a conservative idea. I always believed that the government can and should have a say in corporate decisions. But right now, I describe how things ARE in the US and not how I want them to be. And the reality is that the US gives less room to the government to intervene to corporate polices. By contrast, big corporations in Germany are even forced to have things like worker representatives in the board of directors. So, it is apples and oranges t make comparisons between US and Germany. But I also believe that regardless of the politics, Germans simply do not have the confidence Americans have regarding the freedom of speech and I do not blame them. Letting neonazi have their own party and use nazi symbols sounds like a stupid idea for a nation that was literally burned to the ground because of the nazis.
What? Most Democratic progressives now furiously oppose free speech and wildly support the richest white men on earth taking ownership of all news, info and social media outlets to then allow only political speech they approve of.
Outlawing the new international corporate fascist racist Democratic Party should have happened at the end of the Civil War, when the Democratic Party's richest white men in the United States - Southern slave owners - tried to create their own slave nation. Losing the civil war, the Democrats richest white men in the USA and on earth not must have their people-of-color slavery operations in foreign slavery factories in other countries. Like before the Civil War, most Democrats again want the richest white men and slavers to run the country and control what anyone may say and hear.
History always repeats itself. The Democratic Party always reverts to worshipping rich white male slavers.
Again, the existing stance on freedom of speech is a result of conservatives and moderate progressives. Because none of them is a socialist democrat, this is also the reason why in the US corporations make decisions about what messages they should promote or not. And sorry, but it is fake news that liberals have taken ownership of all news. Murdoch was very conservative, and local news are also controlled to a large degree by a very conservative conglomerate called Sinclair
Here is some of its brainwashing
It's illegal in Germany to even have a Nazi flag. We are in an active fight to suppress a nazi uprising while her government censurship is to suppress a dead one.Merkel is Trumps main antagonist on the international stage for the last 4 years, so nobody can suspect her to just side with him for any sympathy.
https://www.ft.com/content/6146b352-6b40-48ef-b10b-a34ad585b91a
Angela Merkel, German chancellor, has sharply criticised Twitter’s decision to ban US president Donald Trump, calling it a “problematic” breach of the “fundamental right to free speech”. Twitter suspended Mr Trump’s account last week in the aftermath of the riots at the Capitol Building, citing “repeated and severe” violations of its civic integrity policies. Facebook has taken similar action. But Ms Merkel said through her spokesman that the US government should follow Germany’s lead in adopting laws that restrict online incitement, rather than leaving it up to platforms such as Twitter and Facebook to make up their own rules. The intervention highlights a key area of disagreement between the US and Europe on how to regulate social media platforms. The EU wants to give regulators more powers to force internet platforms such as Facebook or Twitter to remove illegal content. In the US, technology companies have traditionally been left to themselves to police their own sites, though momentum is gathering behind political moves to curtail their regulatory freedoms. Several members of Congress are working on bills which would limit the legal protections social media companies have from being sued for third-party content posted on their sites. Others are pushing for a new federal data privacy bill that could mirror the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation. Twitter’s share price fell more than 7 per cent on Monday to about $48, as investors were spooked by the renewed debate into the prospect of tighter social media regulation. Ms Merkel’s spokesman, Steffen Seibert, said free speech was a “fundamental right of vital importance” that could be restricted, “but only in accordance with the laws and within a framework defined by the legislator — not by the decision of the management of social media platforms”. He said for that reason the chancellor found it “problematic” that Mr Trump’s accounts had been indefinitely suspended.
But the alternative is the state then gets to decide what is and isn't allowed. We have a 1A that prohibits that, and a 1A that guarantees a right to free association, which means DP and Twitter et al. can kick off anyone they want for any reason.It's a sad day when a European country calls out the US on free speech.
There has been no restriction of anyone's free speech. In America, we are protected from the government infringing on our freedoms. We have however, bent over to allow corporations to pretty much do as they please.
Big tech is right to proceed with caution. Calling their adherence to US law tyranny is laughable at best.
This is actually a conservative idea. I always believed that the government can and should have a say in corporate decisions. But right now, I describe how things ARE in the US and not how I want them to be. And the reality is that the US gives less room to the government to intervene to corporate polices. By contrast, big corporations in Germany are even forced to have things like worker representatives in the board of directors. So, it is apples and oranges t make comparisons between US and Germany. But I also believe that regardless of the politics, Germans simply do not have the confidence Americans have regarding the freedom of speech and I do not blame them. Letting neonazi have their own party and use nazi symbols sounds like a stupid idea for a nation that was literally burned to the ground because of the nazis.
Merkel does know that his freedom of speech has not been violated, only his use of the Twitter page has been removed. Twitter is a private company with rules and regulations. Her own party would also kick people out if they broke the rules of her party.
Private businesses have the right to makes rules regarding their services. If you take out a page on a web page provider in Germany and you are a holocaust denier then the provider has the freedom to kick them out for violating their rules. I think Merkel is involving herself in things that are not her business. She is not owner of Twitter and I think she has no recourse to question the company rules of Twitter regarding unacceptable tweets.
Germany can not determine who Twitter allows to have an account. Only if German law is violated (like the twitter account of holocaust deniers) I would assume the German government has some recourse to force twitter to take actions.
It's illegal in Germany to even have a Nazi flag. We are in an active fight to suppress a nazi uprising while her government censurship is to suppress a dead one.
They decide what you say, they decide what you eat. They poison you, hold you down. They bought your government. Thats quite tyrannical for me.
Of course she has. In Germany, Twitters rules are forced under the law.
You are wrong. In several court cases in Germany, Twitter and Facebook were forced to unblock users and reupload comments and were also handed heavy penalties
Ummm neonazis do have their own party here, the NPD.
It isn't.I dont think it is very positive to live in a corporate dystopia.
Twitter is not a state actor.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?