OMM 0000 wrote: » You cannot be looking at any right leaning news sources if you're unaware of this issue. It's spoken about almost every day. It's actually one of their main topics, along the lines of the usual nonsense like immigration and transgenders.
ancapailldorcha wrote: » Of course I'm going to stick to it. You've given me no incentive to do otherwise. You have no idea what media I choose to consume so you just decide for yourself and use that as a cop out. Telling people to google your argument is just lazy and deserves to be dismissed as such.
OMM 0000 wrote: » I already know where this is going. I've been using the internet for too long. You have your opinion, and you're going to stick to it. The fact that you're unaware of this topic tells me you restrict yourself to left wing news sources. Right wing news sources CONSTANTLY talk about this issue.
ancapailldorcha wrote: » Ah now. You have to actually formulate an argument. It's not lazy of me to do all your work for you.
OMM 0000 wrote: » Obviously do whatever you want, but if you're too lazy to leave your political bubble, I know I would be wasting my time anyway.
ancapailldorcha wrote: » You have nothing then. I'm not going to research an argument that you're too lazy to substantiate.
OMM 0000 wrote: » If you google it, there are tons of articles on this topic. It's constantly discussed by people like Joe Rogan, Tim Pool, etc. I'm not right wing.
ancapailldorcha wrote: » That's an opinion piece.
GinAndBitter wrote: » None of that was mentioned as the reasons for the ban. The reasons that were mentioned above in the BBC link, calling for Muslims to be beheaded was one I've never seen him post anything like that although I may have missed it.
OMM 0000 wrote: » https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/09/12/social-media-facebook-twitter-google-youtube-bias-conservatives-republicans-column/1250893002/
mcmoustache wrote: » Really? You think that Facebook banned him because of something in a TV show? That's actually where your mind went with the information that you have? You didn't consider that maybe using facebook's platform to spread a lie that had the effect of ddosing the phone lines of a rape crisis centre might have had something to do with it or that maybe he simply failed to heed the warning from facebook? Yeah, it must be the TV show.
ancapailldorcha wrote: » I asked for a source because I don't believe your claim. This isn't a source.
OMM 0000 wrote: » That wasn't my point. My point is how the right are overwhelmingly targeted for bans. There are all sorts of leftist crazies posting crazy stuff, yet they don't get banned. I look at some antifa accounts and they're constantly talking about hurting people, doxxing people, etc. Yet they almost never get banned. Surely you can admit there is political bias amongst the media and tech companies?
ancapailldorcha wrote: » Almost as if they don't want to be linked to a racist faudster.
OMM 0000 wrote: » How about all the accounts calling for the doxxing or killing of the Covington Catholic High School kids? None of those got banned.
ancapailldorcha wrote: » Source?
OMM 0000 wrote: » Why are the accounts of the far left, who promote violence and doxxing, rarely banned?
ancapailldorcha wrote: » Refusing to give bigots a platform isn't bias. It's common sense.
OMM 0000 wrote: » Strange how the accounts banned by Facebook, Instagram, YouTube & Twitter are almost always those on the political right.
GinAndBitter wrote: » The timing of these bans is certainly strange, wonder has it anything to do with the hit piece about to be aired by the lying BBC about him.
stefanovich wrote: » https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-47371290
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
