Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Alex Jones content removed from Facebook, Youtube, Apple

Options
1…457910…59

Comments

  • Options
    #182
    Grayson
    Registered Users Posts: 16,126 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    Eh... https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/08/06/facebook-deletes-infowars-alex-jones-hate-speech-lgbt-racist-hate-speech/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=FB_IA&utm_campaign=PN

    From that link. I highlighted one bit that made me go WTF? Even for jones that's a new type of crazy.
    On InfoWars in July Jones called for drag queens to be burned alive.

    Addressing drag performers on his show, he said: “We’re going to destroy you. You will ascend to Hell in the reverse order.

    They now know fear, because we’re coming like the villagers in the night, with the torches burning bright, with fire.

    “Fire is not the weapon of evil, fire is the weapon of good, and it will consume you.

    “You need to fear god. Your god has stolen your soul.”

    He added: “Soon the icy cold of Hell will embrace you forever.

    “Soon you will pass through and on, never to return to this dimension, never to ascend, but down, down, down, down, down, down, down into that black hole you’re going, chained.”

    Also this month, Jones claimed that Barack Obama was having sex with “ten dudes a day” in one anti-LGBT rant.

    The internet host also recently complained that people call him homophobic because he won’t let them have sex with his car.

    Jones tore into the “LGBTQ23PCL4 agenda”, claiming kids are being taught to have sex with cars, and that the promotion of sex with cars was now mandatory in the US, Canada and the UK.

    He said: “They’re now saying sex with machines or sex with cars or sex with appliances—there’s a whole big movement where people are marrying their cars, marrying their toasters, marrying their dogs, their cats, their horses. I’m not kidding.

    “They’re catching people in public places – you see it all the time – trying to have sex with a Ferrari or trying to have sex with a ’57 Chevy.

    “They actually – I’m not going to get into the details of what they do, but they lube up the tailpipe and everything and then the police come up and there’s a guy hunching your car.”

    He added: “This is the breakdown with society, and if you don’t let somebody have sex with your car, you’re a homophobe, you’re a bigot, you’re a horrible person.

    “By the way, this is not satire. I’m not kidding here. This is what they’re teaching kids now.

    “We’ve got to start saying, we’re for normal biological behaviour and the future of the human species.”


  • Options
    #183
    splashuum
    Registered Users Posts: 519 ✭✭✭splashuum


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    Eh... https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/08/06/facebook-deletes-infowars-alex-jones-hate-speech-lgbt-racist-hate-speech/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=FB_IA&utm_campaign=PN

    There is regular LBGT members on Alex’s show. One of the many high profile members being Milo Yionnopolous.
    And did you actually just reply with a “PinkNews” article ? Please at least do a bit of research instead of taking sensational fake news sites as gospel.


  • Options
    #184
    dark crystal
    Registered Users Posts: 10,962 ✭✭✭✭dark crystal


    splashuum wrote: »
    Wether you like Alex or not is besides the point. Can people not see the monopoly these platforms now have ? This sort of draconian action has opened a seriously dangerous door.
    All these companies got rid of Alex within hours of each other and not one of them were able to give or pinpoint a specific reason for the removal of his channels.

    They all gave specific reasons:


    https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/06/apple-pulls-alex-jones-infowars-podcasts-for-hate-speech.html

    They are now almost entirely controlling what we see and hear. The death of independent media looms!

    Would you call them the enemy of the people?


  • Options
    #185
    Billy86
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,495 ✭✭✭✭Billy86


    Hector Bellend wrote: »
    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    Facebook, Youtube, Apple et al are entitled to stop him saying it. It is their platform. They make the rules.

    What are the rules?
    These:

    https://www.youtube.com/static?gl=IE&template=terms

    https://m.facebook.com/terms.php


  • Options
    #186
    Grayson
    Registered Users Posts: 16,126 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    splashuum wrote: »
    There is regular LBGT members on Alex’s show. One of the many high profile members being Milo Yionnopolous.
    And did you actually just reply with a “PinkNews” article ? Please at least do a bit of research instead of taking sensational fake news sites as gospel.

    The irony of calling pink news fake news when defending alex jones.

    Someone also replied with a cnbc link. is that fake news too?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #187
    WinnyThePoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,417 ✭✭✭WinnyThePoo


    Grayson wrote: »
    The irony of calling pink news fake news when defending alex jones.

    Someone also replied with a cnbc link. is that fake news too?

    It's all fake news to some.


  • Options
    #188
    super_furry
    Registered Users Posts: 27,321 ✭✭✭✭super_furry


    DickSwiveller Returns wrote: »
    Do you have faith in these companies; that they're completely fair minded in who they ban and who they don't. Do you think it is possible that ideological bias can play a part in such bans. For example, Sarah Jeong, the journalist recently hired by the NY Times has spent years on twitter engaged in what some would consider 'hate speech' against white people, yet she is still there.

    Alex Jones is still on Twitter too.

    Anyway, I've been reliably informed that Infowars actually deleted their Youtube account themselves in a false-flag attack in which Alex Jones is a professional crisis actor.

    Also he's Bill Hicks.


  • Options
    #189
    DickSwiveller Returns
    Closed Accounts Posts: 752 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller Returns


    super_furry wrote: »
    Alex Jones is still on Twitter too.

    Anyway, I've been reliably informed that Infowars actually deleted their Youtube account themselves in a false-flag attack in which Alex Jones is a professional crisis actor.

    Also he's Bill Hicks.

    You didn't answer any of my questions


  • Options
    #190
    Venom
    Registered Users Posts: 6,984 ✭✭✭Venom


    DickSwiveller Returns wrote: »
    You didn't answer any of my questions


    That does tend to happen a lot around here :pac:


  • Options
    #191
    Sonics2k
    Registered Users Posts: 8,239 ✭✭✭Sonics2k


    splashuum wrote: »
    There is regular LBGT members on Alex’s show. One of the many high profile members being Milo Yionnopolous.
    And did you actually just reply with a “PinkNews” article ? Please at least do a bit of research instead of taking sensational fake news sites as gospel.

    My god the irony. Alex Jones is literally making millions from spreading fake news.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #192
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,158 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    DickSwiveller Returns wrote: »
    You didn't answer any of my questions




    Your question was already answered. Jeong is still on twitter as is Jones. they have applied the same standard to both.


  • Options
    #193
    DickSwiveller Returns
    Closed Accounts Posts: 752 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller Returns


    Grayson wrote: »
    She trolled some trolls. When someone trolled her with racist/offensive language she replied with the same language. She never initiated these contacts. Her current employer and her previous employer have both vouched for her. And she's apologised for any offence she may have caused.

    Do you think a person writing those kind of tweets, substituting the word black for white would be punished?
    the alt right are trying to get people like her fired for a bad joke.
    When did I say I agree with that?
    And to mention her in a thread about alex jones is just bad whatabouttery. She never trolled sandyhook survivors.

    I'm making the point that these companies are driven by ideological bias in their enforcement of rules. You didn't address any f my questions.


  • Options
    #194
    Pac1Man
    Registered Users Posts: 4,394 ✭✭✭Pac1Man


    I'm sure someone has mentioned this quote already but Noam Chomsky said it best.

    "If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all."


  • Options
    #195
    super_furry
    Registered Users Posts: 27,321 ✭✭✭✭super_furry


    DickSwiveller Returns wrote: »
    You didn't answer any of my questions

    Do you have faith in these companies; that they're completely fair minded in who they ban and who they don't?

    Not really, I think they let Infowars and Alex Jones go on for far too long because of the eyeballs they provide and revenue from them. They should have taken this action a long time ago.

    Do you think it is possible that ideological bias can play a part in such bans?

    Is it possible? Sure. But I think that money is the bigger draw. A much smaller channel with a smaller audience wouldn't have lasted nearly as long.


  • Options
    #196
    super_furry
    Registered Users Posts: 27,321 ✭✭✭✭super_furry


    Pac1Man wrote: »
    I'm sure someone has mentioned this quote already but Noam Chomsky said it best.

    "If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all."

    HE. STILL. HAS. FREEDOM. OF. EXPRESSION.


  • Options
    #197
    pxdf9i5cmoavkz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 827 ✭✭✭pxdf9i5cmoavkz


    Wanderer78 wrote: »
    Save yourself the time and energy, and don't bother


    The world needs to know about the chemicals that turn the freaking frogs gay!


  • Options
    #198
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    Ulysses Gaze wrote: »
    Wait a minute....what?

    No idea about frogs, but it actually said on the news this morning (via The University of York), that earth worms were absorbing traces of Prozac {Fluoxetine} (apparently millions are on this stuff) through the soil.

    Which in turn was turing female Starlings off natural reproduction after eating them. The bioaccumulation of pharma products through the ecology may also have small direct effects on humans.

    So don't eat any Starlings for lunch whatever you do, or urban blackbird pie.


  • Options
    #199
    dark crystal
    Registered Users Posts: 10,962 ✭✭✭✭dark crystal


    super_furry wrote: »
    HE. STILL. HAS. FREEDOM. OF. EXPRESSION.


    You'd swear we live in Gilead...


  • Options
    #200
    Grayson
    Registered Users Posts: 16,126 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    Lilah Defeated Pediatrics wrote: »
    No idea about frogs, but it actually said on the news this morning (via The University of York), that earth worms were absorbing traces of Prozac {Fluoxetine} (apparently millions are on this stuff) through the soil.

    Which in turn was turing female Starlings off natural reproduction after eating them. The bioaccumulation of pharma products through the ecology may also have small direct effects on humans.

    So don't eat any Starlings for lunch whatever you do, or urban blackbird pie.

    Don't know about you but I always fancy a cockmeat sandwich after a bottle of Evian. That might be because it's french though.


  • Options
    #201
    Wanderer78
    Registered Users Posts: 28,808 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    Aidan Freezing Rattler wrote:
    The world needs to know about the chemicals that turn the freaking frogs gay!


    I withdraw my previous comments, I stand corrected


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #202
    nullzero
    Registered Users Posts: 16,369 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    ****


    super_furry wrote: »
    We can still do that. Alex Jones isn't going to go away. He still has his voice, still has free speech and will still have his core audience.

    The only thing changing is that, like others who seek to radicalise, he won't have access to certain privately owned platforms.

    I think this only serves to galvanize the people who absorb this stuff and ultimately could lead to another term for Trump.
    Freedom of speech isn't something we get to pick and choose regardless of who owns a platform.
    This is a negative move, the road to hell has always been paved with good intentions.

    Glazers Out!



  • Options
    #203
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    Grayson wrote: »
    Don't know about you but I always fancy a cockmeat sandwich after a bottle of Evian. That might be because it's french though.

    Not for me, but sure best to stick to what you're used to.

    Evian should be fine, naturally filtered through the alps and collected at multiple sources from south shore of Lake Geneva.


  • Options
    #204
    Faugheen
    Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    P_1 wrote: »
    Have to say I'm not a fan of no platforming. Irrespective of how abhorrent you may find someone's opinions its better to leave them in the open and open to public scrutiny and ridicule. As was mentioned in another thread its shït like this that will get the Orange Buffoon reelected in 2020.

    Have to say I’m not a fan of giving someone who thinks Sandy Hook was all one big conspiracy a platform, so f*ck him as far as I’m concerned.


  • Options
    #205
    Billy86
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,495 ✭✭✭✭Billy86


    Pac1Man wrote: »
    I'm sure someone has mentioned this quote already but Noam Chomsky said it best.

    "If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all."
    He is still free to express himself. As is youtube or facebook, or indeed boards.



    If I threw insult after insult after insult your way, inspired people to send you death threats on the back of your child dying by calling you a fake crisis actor who onstage the whole thing, refused to stop after the death threats kept coming in, labelled you a pedophile, continuously stated you were running a pedophile ring from your workplace and so on and so on... I would be banned.

    And this is exactly what happened here with YouTube and FB.


  • Options
    #206
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 37,244 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Call Me Jimmy wrote: »
    I think he is potentially dangerous but so are a lot of things. Really would like to hear what you mean by 'actively harmful', I mean really specifically. He didn't get banned for anything he said about sandy hook.

    Was heartened to see youtuber Kyle Kulinksy seeing the wood for the trees on this issue and as he said nobody debunked/attacked Jones more vehemently than him.

    I was talking about the parents of the Sandy Hook kids getting harassed online. I'm not advocating banning the likes of Ben Shapiro or anything like that. Jones is a completely different beast.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Options
    #207
    mcmoustache
    Registered Users Posts: 7,237 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    Whatever about Alex Jones's treatment, I just wish the social media companies would enforce their own rules more consistently.

    Most of them have rules about the usual stuff like hate-speech, incitement etc but there's no consistent approach to it. For some social media companies, users are allowed to continue breaking those rules if they have enough followers (aka advertising revenue). Then there are other cases where "kill all blacks" is classified as hate-speech but "kill all whites" is not.

    I get that these are private companies and they can run their business in whatever way they want within the laws of the jurisdictions in which they operate but some consistency would be nice.

    On Alex Jones, the man's a scumbag. He knows that he's just making stuff up and he knows that enough of his followers are dumb enough to take him seriously enough to harass innocent people. He would have been banned long ago if he wasn't so popular among the low-information types.


  • Options
    #208
    Cienciano
    Registered Users Posts: 14,226 ✭✭✭✭Cienciano


    Malayalam wrote: »
    Given that youtube hosts beheading videos and videos from extremist Imams inciting hatred I'd say Jones is fairly low down the pecking order of depravity and being disgusting on corporate bandwidth. Not to mention the mind numbing inanity of what constitutes the bulk of content on all these platforms.
    I don't think youtube host these videos you're talking about like beheading videos. Any chance you could link some?


  • Options
    #209
    mcmoustache
    Registered Users Posts: 7,237 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    nullzero wrote: »
    I think this only serves to galvanize the people who absorb this stuff and ultimately could lead to another term for Trump.

    That could be the case but it could go the other way too. If the right in the US treat this as something they're willing to fight about, Jones's nonsense will be under more scrutiny in the press and it could create an association in the minds of independents between Republicans and Alex Jones. It's one thing to be associated with Trump but Alex Jones is a whole other level of crazy.


  • Options
    #210
    Malayalam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,188 ✭✭✭Malayalam


    Cienciano wrote: »
    I don't think youtube host these videos you're talking about like beheading videos. Any chance you could link some?

    I can't really, I've never seen any, thank goodness. But my young adult children have told me they have seen them on there. Perhaps they only last for a while or are edited into clip collections or something. As for the radical Imams again I have heard from Arab-speaking friends that one can access them on Youtube. I am going on what I've been told but maybe the info is incorrect.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #211
    mcmoustache
    Registered Users Posts: 7,237 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    Malayalam wrote: »
    I can't really, I've never seen any, thank goodness. But my young adult children have told me they have seen them on there. Perhaps they only last for a while or are edited into clip collections or something. As for the radical Imams again I have heard from Arab-speaking friends that one can access them on Youtube. I am going on what I've been told but maybe the info is incorrect.

    It's certainly the case a few years back that Youtube was rather slow to remove these videos. They've gotten better at removing them now but a part of me thinks that this was done for the benefit of authoritarian regimes seeking to avoid more Arab Springs.


Advertisement