Elizabeth Warren Demands That Amazon Hide Books

[Lord of Planar]

While I think they would like to do that, I think they know better and we wont quite get to that point. Instead, they will just defacto limit access as Warren is doing. First its recommending they dont point people towards books they dont like. Next it will be reccomending they dont sell them. And we already know that amazon and ebay have colluded not to sell some books. Publishers have colluded to not publish some books that go against the govt line.

Looks like she want to start a government approved list...

 

[Lord of Planar]

Leftists were never against book burning. They only were against books they liked being burned.

That's how they are with everything. They want people to embrace differences, until they are differences they don't like. They pretend not to be bigoted, but they are the biggest bigots around.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Speaking of disinformation, this is not what she advocated or asked for.

She asked Amazon to review its recommendation algorithms to see why these disinformation books seemed to be recommended so regularly over good information.

But who gets to make that determination? I haven't read or heard of the contents of those books. What if they do present things in the proper light?

Have you read the contents or are you just relying on what others claim?

 

[Deuce]

Of course it said what it said; I was reading the letter while summarizing and quoting its odious content.

That all you can provide is a burp of one or two sentences of unsupported denial says it all - Warren is guilty as charged.

She didn't make a threat, you invented one.
She didn't demand any action, you invented that.
She didn't ask for a book to be banned, you invented that.

 

[NoMoreDems-Reps]

That's the rub, isn't it?

Take Ivermectin for example. This drug has uniformly been dismissed as "misinformation" simply, IMHO, because it goes against the administration's and big Pharma push for vaccinations. Matt Taibbi had a great piece on this a few weeks back.

Ivermectin: Can a Drug Be "Right-Wing"?

A potential Covid-19 treatment has become hostage to a larger global fight between populists and anti-populists

taibbi.substack.com

Similarly with respect to the "unvaccinated." They are now the enemy, to be shunned, scorned, shamed and stoned in the public square. Any publications that promote natural immunity are to be banned as "misinformation." In spite of the fact that one of the largest COVID research projects to date, out of Israel, with tens of thousands of participants has shown that natural immunity is 13- 27 times more robust than the vaccines. THis has to be dismissed as "misinformation" as it cuts to the heart of the Biden's vaccine mandate.

It's not "unvaccinated" it "Pure Blood" !

 

[Fishking]

That's how they are with everything. They want people to embrace differences, until they are differences they don't like. They pretend not to be bigoted, but they are the biggest bigots around.

For sure...they only care about it up until the point they have enough power to enforce what they want on everyone else. That's why UC Berkley was miss-named the birthplace of free speech. People were mislead on that because they were always fighting for the freedom to express their far-left ideology. It ain't so free speechy there now that that have enough power to make it only what they approve of.

 

[Deuce]

That's the rub, isn't it?

Take Ivermectin for example. This drug has uniformly been dismissed as "misinformation" simply, IMHO, because it goes against the administration's and big Pharma push for vaccinations. Matt Taibbi had a great piece on this a few weeks back.

Ivermectin: Can a Drug Be "Right-Wing"?

A potential Covid-19 treatment has become hostage to a larger global fight between populists and anti-populists

taibbi.substack.com

Similarly with respect to the "unvaccinated." They are now the enemy, to be shunned, scorned, shamed and stoned in the public square. Any publications that promote natural immunity are to be banned as "misinformation." In spite of the fact that one of the largest COVID research projects to date, out of Israel, with tens of thousands of participants has shown that natural immunity is 13- 27 times more robust than the vaccines. THis has to be dismissed as "misinformation" as it cuts to the heart of the Biden's vaccine mandate.

LMAO

Invermectin use has been criticized because people have been buying the livestock version

 

[Lord of Planar]

LMAO

Invermectin use has been criticized because people have been buying the livestock version

Yea, that when it becomes stupid.

 

[Aletheia]

I think you're projecting a conspiracy theory because you just don't like Warren.

Wow, all that and I get conspiracy theory as a retort. I don't have anything against Warren. I already said, in this case, I think she's just misinformed (maybe good intentions, maybe not).
The same way Trump zealots don't 'need' access to all of the vendor proprietary voting machines and algorithms, Warren does not need to scrutinize amazon's algorithms.
Warren likely looks at the top of lists and doesn't like what she sees. Who is she to say they are getting paid off to favor anti covid books -- that's the market speaking.
If she really cared, she could sponsor a study to look at biases in book selection. Show some hard evidence of bias, before demanding them to turn over their secret sauce (algorithms). I think she's more interested in making it look like she's making a big deal over big, bad amazon, but nothing will come of it.

 

[The Stars Tremble]

Yea, that when it becomes stupid.

The human version should come with "High School Graduation Certificate Required" and a ten question quiz on viruses and insects.

Animal version which can be stronger (eg to kill bovine lice) should require presence of the animal to purchase, or preferably be left to the vet!

 

[Rawley]

LMAO

Invermectin use has been criticized because people have been buying the livestock version

Warren singled out books on Ivermectin as ones she wants banned/burned/hidden

 

[Rawley]

Wow, all that and I get conspiracy theory as a retort. I don't have anything against Warren. I already said, in this case, I think she's just misinformed (maybe good intentions, maybe not).
The same way Trump zealots don't 'need' access to all of the vendor proprietary voting machines and algorithms, Warren does not need to scrutinize amazon's algorithms.

You don't see a difference?

 

[COTO]

There is nothing illegal or improper concerning her letter.

Its legality doesn't concern me.

It most certainly lacks propriety, and we must conclude that anyone who can't perceive why is grossly ignorant of the history and trajectory of suppression of contra-consensus research/literature.

Even if you're positive there isn't a shred of truth in the literature (and how could you be?), the very principle of what Sen. Warren is trying to do ought to offend you. Her contempt for her role as a defender of free expression in a democratic plurality should offend you.

 

[Deuce]

Warren singled out books on Ivermectin as ones she wants banned/burned/hidden

If you're going to keep lying about what she said, I guess we're done here.

 

[Rawley]

If you're going to keep lying about what she said, I guess we're done here.

Deal. Your refusal to even admit Warren goal here makes further discussion rather fruitless.

 

[Deuce]

Deal. Your refusal to even admit Warren goal here makes further discussion rather fruitless.

Tell you what, we'll make it a bet. $100 forum donation says these books are not removed from Amazon. Whatever timeframe you like.

 

[Rawley]

Tell you what, we'll make it a bet. $100 forum donation says these books are not removed from Amazon. Whatever timeframe you like.

Of course they won't be. Amazon will tell Warren to take her book burning and shove it.

 

[jonny5]

She didn't make a threat, you invented one.
She didn't demand any action, you invented that.
She didn't ask for a book to be banned, you invented that.

"This pattern and practice of misbehavior suggests that Amazon is either unwilling or unable to modify its business practices to prevent the spread of falsehoods or the sale of inappropriate products—an unethical, unacceptable, and potentially unlawful course of action from one of the nation’s largest retailers"

"Despite the fact that vaccination remains our greatest tool to protect Americans from the virus, myths about COVID-19 vaccines continue to spread, often facilitated by technology companies that refuse to curb misinformation.10"

That sounds like a threat to me.

 

[Deuce]

"This pattern and practice of misbehavior suggests that Amazon is either unwilling or unable to modify its business practices to prevent the spread of falsehoods or the sale of inappropriate products—an unethical, unacceptable, and potentially unlawful course of action from one of the nation’s largest retailers"

"Despite the fact that vaccination remains our greatest tool to protect Americans from the virus, myths about COVID-19 vaccines continue to spread, often facilitated by technology companies that refuse to curb misinformation.10"

That sounds like a threat to me.

If their actions are, in fact, unlawful then it's not a threat, it's just enforcing the law.

Is that a problem?

 

[jonny5]

If their actions are, in fact, unlawful then it's not a threat, it's just enforcing the law.

Is that a problem?

A stated intent to charge someone with a crime is still a threat (to cause damage). If there is indeed some law that states a company cant direct people to books that express ideas, then yes thats a serious problem. If there is anything unlawful here its Warrens using her official power to threaten companies for the purpose of abridging speech.

 

[Manc Skipper]

She didn't make a threat, you invented one.
She didn't demand any action, you invented that.
She didn't ask for a book to be banned, you invented that.

Yes, but apart from all that she has cooties! Or something/anything bad!

 

[Deuce]

A stated intent to charge someone with a crime is still a threat (to cause damage).

That's not what she said.

If there is indeed some law that states a company cant direct people to books that express ideas, then yes thats a serious problem. If there is anything unlawful here its Warrens using her official power to threaten companies for the purpose of abridging speech.

If there's nothing unlawful, then there's no threat.

 

[Lord of Planar]

The human version should come with "High School Graduation Certificate Required" and a ten question quiz on viruses and insects.

Animal version which can be stronger (eg to kill bovine lice) should require presence of the animal to purchase, or preferably be left to the vet!

I'm not for more restrictions on things, if people want to play Russian Roulette. That's their choice. That's a stupid game now isn't it.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Of course they won't be. Amazon will tell Warren to take her book burning and shove it.

In fairness, she was complaining about how the search brings them to the top. She didn't ask them to be removed or burned. Just the same though, its a slippery slope. Especially to the casual pobserver who only has the word of others the contents of the so-called misinformation.

 

[NatMorton]

Elizabeth Warren Demands That Amazon Crack Down on COVID Misinformation

Amazon's customers are apparently unable to judge the veracity of COVID-related information for themselves.

reason.com

Here you have the federal govt yet against asking a bookseller to hide books the federal govt doesnt agree with. The only thing missing from her letter is 'or else'. Sadly Amazon will likely go along, as they already shown a few times they do not respect free speech or limited govt. And since most people dont care either, Amazon will go along, make lots of money, give lots of it to the govt, in taxes and campaign donations, and get favorable treatment from the govt.

Simply going along with the govts tyranny is more valuable to politicians than money. And the minority of us with principles will continue to get screwed from all sides.

Liz is auditioning to be our nation’s first Minister of Truth.

By the way, would lying about one’s ancestry on a job application be considered “misinformation?”