Angela Merkel attacks Twitter over Trump ban

[Kushinator]

In Germany we dont allow private companies to dictate us. Twitter is forced here to follow our laws.

And here, Twitter follows our laws. Notice the lack of force in this distinction....

 

[motorpsychle]

Maybe it's also, that Merkel now has not the faintest idea what the loose cannon and witch hunt whining coward is going to do next.

And yes, it is fact that the in many or all ways low quality social media, where any retard will scream about, might play a worrysome role in shaping "course of history".

 

[Perotista]

In Germany we dont allow private companies to dictate us. Twitter is forced here to follow our laws.

Twitter is following U.S. law.

 

[pamak]

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.

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.

 

[Peter King]

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”.

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.

 

[Peter King]

In Germany we dont allow private companies to dictate us. Twitter is forced here to follow our laws.

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.

 

[Chagos]

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.

 

[Peter King]

Methinks, with all due respect, that you've somewhat missed the point she was making.

I understood, but she is stepping out of her role and wants to interfere in other people's business.

 

[joko104]

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 - and to remove any and all speech that is contrary to their personal and professional profit and power interests.

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 now must have their people-of-color slavery operations in foreign slavery factories they operate and own 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 and love of corporate-fascist slavery operations against people-of-color on behalf of themselves and white people.

 

[pamak]

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

Sinclair Broadcast Group - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Here is some of its brainwashing

 

[joko104]

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

Sinclair Broadcast Group - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Here is some of its brainwashing

Liberals haven't taken over the news. That's the biggest falsehood of all. Progressivism is the antithesis of liberalism. The richest corporate fascists on earth, nearly all white men and extreme racial segregationists and racists have taken 100% control as in 100% ownership of the news - which no longer is news but corporate news letters in pursuit of corporate interests, nothing else.

The richest corporations and people on earth are not liberal, not conservative, not communist and not socialists. They are corporate fascists whose goal is a purely authoritarian plutocracy.

 

[poweRob]

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.

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.

 

[JasperL]

It's a sad day when a European country calls out the US on free speech.

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.

So it's not sad - they just have a different system. If you want the state to tell us what is and isn't allowed, fine. Make the case.

 

[Rostocker]

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.

I dont think it is very positive to live in a corporate dystopia.

 

[Rostocker]

Big tech is right to proceed with caution. Calling their adherence to US law tyranny is laughable at best.

Oh really? 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.

 

[Rostocker]

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.

Ummm neonazis do have their own party here, the NPD.

 

[Rostocker]

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.

Of course she has. In Germany, Twitters rules are forced under the law.

 

[Rostocker]

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.

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

 

[Rostocker]

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.

It is not illegal to have a nazi flag here.

Seriously? Where do you guys get such ridicolous statements regarding german law? You can have Nazi memorabilia. Its not allowed to wave such stuff in public for political reasons. Its allowed for art and reenactment for example

 

[Kushinator]

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.

Sanctimonious nonsense aside, you don't have a point. But you do make a good case as to why German tech startups are not as successful as their American counterparts.

 

[Peter King]

Of course she has. In Germany, Twitters rules are forced under the law.

I seriously doubt Germany can force Twitter to unblock members who have broken the rules of the platform.

 

[Peter King]

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

Strange, according to the Netzwerkdurchsetzungsgesetz social network companies are forced to delete criminally offending responses/tweets in an attempt to stop fake news and illegal speech in Germany, or else they will be punished with huge fines for not deleting these message. Which kinda sounds exactly the opposite to what you claim. I am sure you will be able to post links of trustworthy media sources stating what you claim about Twitter/facebook/etc..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_Enforcement_Act

 

[pamak]

Ummm neonazis do have their own party here, the NPD.

They do not use nazi flags though, so they are forced to mask their true beliefs about Hilter and Nazis.

and there was an attempt (by the German government) to outlaw the party

Germany wants to ban the neo-Nazis of the NPD again, but why now? | Cas Mudde

A backlash against refugees has led to growing support for the far right and the need to send a strong signal of disapproval

www.theguardian.com

and the German court's rationale for rejecting it was that the party was too small to impose any threat.

German top court blocks ban on far right NPD

The German constitutional court says the NPD is not a significant enough threat to democracy.

www.bbc.com

The constitutional court in Karlsruhe ruled that the NPD was hostile to German democracy but the party "lacks sufficient weight to enable its actions to lead to success".

In other words, according to the German courts, the freedom of speech for a bigger party with the exact same ideology can be restricted.

 

[mrjurrs]

I dont think it is very positive to live in a corporate dystopia.

It isn't.

 

[OpportunityCost]

Twitter is not a state actor.

So, in front of Congress, Dorsey replied under oath that his company would never ban a head of state. He stated this over censorship concerns with his company. Then he went and did it anyway and lost 12% of the value of his company.

Shareholders and the SEC were not amused. A lawsuit has begun and the SEC is investigating. Putting political priorities ahead of profit is an irresponsible abuse of power according to shareholders.

Hit the road, Jack.