Alex Jones has been banned for life from Twitter because they don’t like what he writes. Problem is, they’re hiding behind a Terms of Service when in fact, they have just banned a questioning conservative who asks inconvenient (OK, and sometimes dumb) questions.
Twitter’s announced a life-time ban for InfoWars founder Alex Jones, telling us what we’ve long suspected: Not only is Social Media a “progressive-Left” shaping operation, it limits genuine free-ranging speech and discourse.
To be sure, Jones has gotten on the wrong side of many issues. No defending all those. However, on this one – free speech has just ended on social.
From our perspective – rising digital mob rule – the issue is ownership of left-wing American liberal mob’s thought’s and social media dominance.
The left doesn’t like it when someone asks cogent questions (even if based on misstated or wrong assertions) and expects an answer in 1-2-3 logical fashion. Instead, the liberal cadres on social, when challenged on a factual basis, drop into ad hominin attacks, subject-changing, or other Alinskyite forms of answer-avoidance.
Why? Usually because there is often no response to the Leftist agenda that makes sense. The flock of idiots must be protected! Ban the questioners! If free speech is taken out back and shot, oh well, huh?
There is a weak case, in Twitter’s defense, that the banning of Jones may be viewed as partly systemic.
Here’s it lays out: Say Jones gets involved in legal challenges to his positions. Then Twitter – by extension – might be dragged into various legal quagmires – and those might cost money to defend.
If Twitter’s revenue equation considering Jones’ nearly 1.5 million pairs of eyeballs exceeds the potential liability-cost of Twitter involvement to defend and hold-harmless their platform; well, that would be reasonable.
But, that isn’t the case, so far. Instead, Twitter has banned free speech by Jones simply because a corporation — one with a self-admitted left-leaning bias – has decided to selectively enforce its Terms of Service (ToS) to silence a growing conservative backlash to socialist-inspired left-wing online consensus.
We’re of the view that Twitter should not be allowed to ban Jones unless other political extremists are treated equally. This would presumably include those on the left using re-tweet bots and those promoting the monetization of gender and of course, the Manufactured Digital Mob that’s out to removed a duly-elected President.
We don’t see this as being evenly managed. We’re not aware of professed Trump-haters being banned, for example.
Social’s Crooked Business Model
As we have explained, users of social media are Grand Suckers.
Online users willingly contribute free content to corporations that cleverly package the activity of regular people and make money off it.
As we’ve said before, it’s a clever use of a business model that promotes runaway narcissism and other forms of metal illness you can find in the current DSM-5 which (if you’re not keeping up with class) is the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition: DSM-5.”
Dr. Ronald Pies is Professor of Psychiatry, SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, New York, and Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts. In 2009, when the DSM-5 was in the works,, he wrote a very useful and thought-provoking paper: “Should DSM-V Designate “Internet Addiction” a Mental Disorder?”
He saw it coming.
We believe government should ban the for-profit use of social media. In other words, the revenue generated by social should belong (proportionately) to all its contributors.
Think of it as a “digital farmers cooperative.”
Understand this: Unlike the current fears of Ebola becoming a global disease (as noted in this article this morning), or of a killer flu coming in on jets from the Middle East (another valid concern) there’s a larger problem – the elephant in the room – than no one is talking about….
Is Social Media a global mental health issue than needs to be cured?
The unbansurvival.com websites (including Peoplenomics.com) have not made any serious efforts to “engage” in social media. We don’t share our content for free, pure and simple. Comments on our articles are encouraged, but subject to good taste.
Social media companies piggyback on user efforts and extract money from it. F8ck ’em.
Over on the Copyright Alliance website we found a very useful discussion of what happens to our “creative content” if it’s posted on social (Twitter in this case).
No, Social is not “Special”
We don’t believe social media needs to ban Jones. Instead, let existing laws deal with perceived issues that may arise.
That won’t happen, of course, because the Left is in a terrible bind. They can’t afford to allow free speech unchecked. But, at the same time, they’re also being called out for political defamation of conservative views.
Take the Reuters story “Roy Moore files defamation lawsuit against Sacha Baron Cohen, CBS, Showtime.”
Here, the haters of “right-thinking” will no doubt defend on the basis that the mean-spirited ambush attack was just “humor.”
We wanted to summarize the evolving situation in the global media battlespace for you: The Left is killing free speech on the one hand (Twitter) while sure to be defending it (Cohen) on the other.
To us, it all makes sense, though in a distasteful way. Any party or movement that elects socialists (ever hear about Venezuela?) and doesn’t bounce Nancy Pelosi for speaking gibberish, can’t be made-up of very smart people.
Laughably, though, the Universe doesn’t demand IQ tests to hold the presidency, serve in congress, vote, or post on social media. Might be a different world, huh?
Better, we think. Where is Technocracy when we need a bit?
Federal Jobs Report
Just out:
Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 201,000 in August, and the unemployment rate was unchanged at 3.9 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today.
Job gains occurred in professional and business services, health care, wholesale trade, transportation and warehousing, and mining.
Household Survey Data
The unemployment rate remained at 3.9 percent in August, and the number of unemployed persons, at 6.2 million, changed little.
Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rates for adult men (3.5 percent), adult women (3.6 percent), teenagers (12.8 percent), Whites (3.4 percent), Blacks
(6.3 percent), Asians (3.0 percent), and Hispanics (4.7 percent) showed little or no change in August.”
Our usual tear-down of the numbers goes like this:
- We don’t believe the claimed underlying number that the labor force drop 469,000 people month-on-month.
- Even with that, the “Labor Participation Rate” dropped to 62.7 percent – not a good sign.
- Worst of all, the number of people actually working dropped 423,000. Sucks-a-bunch.
- Finally, the CES Birth-Death Model showed 104,000 jobs were “estimated into existence.“
In our view, it’s a terrible report. The kind of report that cuts the legs out from under the Trump-Bump theorist’s argument. Then Tax Cuts were supposed to boost job creation, were they not? I’m not seeing it.
Another non-fitting board piece: CBIZ Small Business Employment Index Illustrates Surge in August Hiring. The what???
When coupled with the huge uptick in the Trade Deficit, it’s not looking good for Trump – and by extension – republicans this fall.
Oh, and there were revisions in the report: “The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for June was revised down from +248,000 to +208,000, and the change for July was revised down from +157,000 to +147,000. With these revisions, employment gains in June and July combined were 50,000 less than previously reported.
Just freaking dandy, huh?
Headlines to Consider
Did the NY Times make-up their “high level” source of the Trump bash of the week? New York Times op-ed sparks denials from Trump staff: A list of officials claiming they’re not the author.
Maybe they were just quoting another intern as “…a high ranking official”…who knows? Did it before, according to reports.
Second Kosovo War, anyone? The Latest: EU says no breakthrough in Serbia, Kosovo talks…
Musk Losing it? “Elon Musk Smokes Marijuana in His First Appearance Since Tweet About Taking Tesla Public…” has us wondering. Not the kind of thing to inspire shareholder confidence, in our view. Ah, but wait. Those aren’t shares, they’re a movement, right?
Well, how about this one, then? “JD.com investors spooked by ‘key man risk’ after CEO accused of rape.”
Dandy…just dandy…
Future’s Less Bright
The Dow futures were down 60 when we looked at 7 AM Central. “World shares driven towards worst week since March by trade tensions” says Reuters.
With the disappointing economic news, Dow futures looked to drop 85 at press time. And down 200 before the day’s out – or more – wouldn’t surprise us in the least.
Watching Florence and several other systems in the tropics. A big cool off for the Northeast…
Moron the ‘morrow – have a great weekend and don’t miss our prepping-and-making-oriented Saturday and Sunday content!
It’s very scary these days. I come from the generation that invited discussion and to some degree – discourse. It fostered critical thinking which has all been bred out or taught out of most of the people running around today. We should invite differing points of view because they allow us to examine and fine tune our own beliefs.
I really wish I had thought of “it” –
1. Give people a device to connect with each other
2. Build in programming and electronics which mimic reward mechanisms so they will not be able to put it down
3. Give them a platform(s) so they can publish their views on everything and thereby let them feel famous, in touch with everyone and relevant.
4. Let them feed upon each other and then tell them what to think
Free speech. Try using the “N-Word” out there.
Amen. BTW when did we start deleting history? Southern in particular!
are there any future prepping content on the menu in regards to greenhouses/’ponics…maybe some stuff from oilman 2? thanks.
“Metal illness”? Have you been watching TSCC again?
Grin
Odd my smell chequer dint pick it yup.
I totally disagree with your stance on social media. There are good, honest People that use it and are NOT for the most part taking part in a “model that promotes runaway narcissism”.
I still think of it as the “town square” for those that have left the nest and just want to keep in contact with friends and family. I use it frequently for personal use and for my business. Both are interrelated in a way because my clean personal life reflects the success of my business. Like a TV show you don’t like, Anyone can choose to view or not view. I would say most people I know use it that way….but admittedly there are those that use it to stir the pot..promote their agendas and create havoc.
Alex Jones creates havoc. I watched the video Between him and Marco Rubio where he kept on interrupting another interview with CNBC and called Rubio names. That’s disrespect and doesn’t help his case one bit. The man is a pr*ck, and looked a little wired on a certain white substance to me.
George, he is wrong most of the time… He is not worth anyone’s time, so who cares?. He has a business model based on crazy and totally fabricated conspiracy theories that he and his producers think up over bourbon and coke (snort), laughing all the way to the bank at the idiots that believe him. His own attorney has stated he is just an entertainer, not a fact based news guy.
I think Twitter is doing us all a favor by throwing this piece of garbage of a man into the trash icon forever. Hopefully, this will result in a different kind of freedom….freedom from lies, nut jobs and the people that believe this garbage.
The civil Town Hall you idealize doesn’t exist. It’s an internet filled with scammers, hackers, two-bit extortionists, and on social, the town square is littered with barricades defended with incendiary speech bombs.
I don’t condone Jones.
I do, however, call out selective enforcement for political ends.
Censor none or censor all – to the same standards.
Alex is no more rude or malicious than, oh, Michael Moore, for example.
Good Lord George, “Free Speech” is only guaranteed by governmental bodies, not free market private participants. If the US gov’t was censoring Jones it would be a free speech First Amendment issue. But Twitter? They can do whatever they want as a private company. It’s a biased media feed like all the other ones, regardless of what they may claim to be. Don’t like what Twitter does? Don’t use it. Don’t follow it. Or Facebook or any of the other social media crap that’s out there, if you’re so convinced they are all left-leaning. Vote with your wallet, or in this case with your eyeballs and attention. But to get up in arms about it and call it a threat to free speech is ridiculous. You have the right to start up your own competing right-wing only Twitter-like echo chamber and let little AJ rant rant all he wants on that platform with whatever followers he can muster. That’s what free speech is about — not an implicit guarantee to use any private company’s resource or offering to promote one’s own agenda.
Private market making money on the back of public infrastructure (Al Gore’s internet)
“Just freaking dandy, huh?”
George, this is what you get when you put $2 trillion on the national credit card *HOPING* that big corporations and rich people will use it to create more jobs.
Big invisible hand newsflash: If you give people money, they keep it! Ha, ha — unless circumstances (such as needing to pay your kid’s tuition) force them to spend it. The simple moral of the story: If your gonna borrow $2 trillion in stimulus, give 90% of it to people who are likely to spend it — not visa versa. BTW, have I mentioned that St. Reagan almost tripled the national debt? LOL. Best, Mike.
About 3 paragraphs down, ‘stock prices doubled and reached an all time high, Sept 3, 1929’ (By November, market crashed 50%)!
https://bennettgreenberg.blogspot.com/2017/09/the-stock-market-crash-of-1929-and.html
Exactly after Labor Day weekend, 2018:
Russell 2000 Globex futures, new all time high 1746.30, 9/4/2018
NASDAQ Globex futures contract 7693.75 new all time high
S&P futures contract: 2912
At an increasing rate, people are talking online only to those of similar inclinations. This is really damaging to the proper discourse necessary to maintain a free society. GLP has gone to registered posters only, and now it’s a far more boring platform. The major “social” media are banning ideas and those who promote them.
Since Twitter has banned Alex Jones with his millions of followers, perhaps President Trump should find an alternative platform that believes in freedom. If both the president and Alex Jones went to such an alternative platform, Twitter may find itself becoming even more pointless than it is.
Personally, I prefer the system here, where people can engage in open discourse, and George, as the website owner, manages things, rather than delegating such management to third parties such as Facebook, Twitter, and their ilk.
The social media platforms colluded against Alex Jones and decided as a group they would make him the “poster boy” for the “Conservative Right.” I don’t think that’s fair and no one should ever be “banned for life” from any of these sites.
Sure, Alex Jones asks a lot of uncomfortable questions, but muting his speech moves the dial in the direction of blindly accepting “official” answers on topics like Sandy Hook, the Vegas shootings, and 9/11.
In a world where our government plays fast and loose with the facts, we need guys like Alex Jones for balance.
Just my opinion, I could be wrong.
Alex likes saying he has sources and they are vetted. Me, I’m waiting for him to tell us more about the Machine Elves.
George, you said,
“Maybe they were just quoting another intern as “…a high ranking official”…who knows?”
Has anyone even considered that the NY Slime post was written by someone at the NY Slime and there is no anonymous source??
of course that would be unethical but this is the NY slime were talking about. If they have any ethics at all, it’s because they stole it from somebody else.
Any more when I read “anonymous source” I assume that it was a conversation overheard on the subway.
If you have a source state the source , if you have an anonymous source shut up.
Definitly a valid question.
Equally possible is that the “leaker” was acting on deliberate instructions by Trump. And I’m not sophisticated enough in the political arena to say what purpose that would serve.
But spies, double agents and deception existed long before Sun Tzu wrote about them.
Darn it has been a year since I read that book.. another on my to read list for this week..
George,Thanks for bringing Sun Tzu in to the conversation. He is underappreciated.
Consider who made you think that the venerable New York Times is the New York Slime. Oh.. it’s our President…the most narcissistic, dumbest, no good crooked politician in the history of world politics. The Times is not failing…The Times does not lie…do they make mistakes? Occasionally…but compared to Fox.. not even close.
Get real. We are in dangerous times and it starts with the crooked idiot in power.
Stupid…
IIRC, if a forum site exercises editorial control over its content beyond the most-conservative application of its TOS, it then assumes legal responsibility for everything [which is] published on its site. This includes 3rd party libel, slander, and defamation.
Bestiality, KP, and most of the topics [lovingly, but inaccurately portrayed] in The Anarchist’s Cookbook should never be posted, because they’re universally illegal. Political and religious content, irrespective their bent or inflammatory nature, should never be abridged. The intent of the Speech and Religion clauses of the First Amendment is to protect unpopular or inflammatory (but not defamatory) content. I agree that social (or any other) media sites have the right to ban whomever they choose, but I contend they cede this right, once they become ubiquitous in a communications space.
Facebook and Twitter especially, will usher in the death of social media, not by their existence, but by forcing a rhyme of 1934.
If George allows I will counter Mark’s negative criticisms of our president and our rights to free speech in our future on Sunday.
And to Mark have a great day ,May all beings be lovingly fulfilled, financially fulfilled and readily fulfilled, So be it.
2000 word limit, some punctuation and no ad hominem attacks and sure….
“Free Speech” isn’t “alive” on web platforms. But it is 99.9(something)% “alive” on the web still. Free Speech in the American context is the ability for the government to censor/not censor. Places like here are under the control of the person who’s paying for the privilege to have the domain and then arrange for content and a way to deliver the content. And with that not-government element the idea of freedom of speech is just not in play for most web content.
Now, if people wanna crawl up @Jack sphincter WRT Twitter for what seems like a personal decision to decide after having the personal interaction with Mr. Jones in DC – by God have a go at that. Because as the cloudflare CEO said about his no longer offering service to someone…that should not be in the scope of power of himself/the firm he CEOs. And ya wanna have a go at @Jack for things happening outside the platform translating to the platform – again, have a go at that.
But if “we” sign up for a social media site “we” agree to their TOS and that contract is not about “free speech”.
Keep in mind: Infowars is still a valid and routed site. And I don’t believe Youtube/Twitter/Facebook is preventing someone from posting links TO infowars or referencing the content at infowars.
And if people wanna have a go at the effective monopoly power of sites https://www.theverge.com/2018/9/4/17816572/tim-wu-facebook-regulation-interview-curse-of-bigness-antitrust is an example of such a fellow traveler.
“To be sure, Jones has gotten on the wrong side of many issues. No defending all those. However, on this one – free speech has just ended on social.”
I never paid him much attention..now my curiosity is aroused..what is it that he’s been talking about that has them up in arms over… How close to the truth is he.
My thoughts have always been on things that anyone wishes to be secret. keep it in the open.. Just elaborate it just enough to make it look stupid..the old hide it in plain site.. With government secrets there’s just to many people that know to be able to keep it quiet. To vast a paper trail. So pop it out..whenever I see some story like that then ever one spending so much to discredit them..those stories catch my eye..why spend so much to discredit something that almost everyone will disregard as bunk.
Twitter muzzleing Alex Jones shows that some companies are willing to say “NO” to the fast talking hustlers promoting baseless conspiracy theories for profit. Some people need to be muzzled & Jones is one of them. Hopefully Twitter is consistent in banning these types for life. Even if they are not, America is better off without the likes of Jones. Hopefully he spends all his ill gotten gains on lawyers. They need the money.
ECS, Replace the name in your text with “Al Gore” and it all applies equally well. Also, you would do well to learn that most, if not all “conspiracy theory” is very much based in hard fact. Some folks just go off in the oddest directions to put those facts together in a way to promote doom and gloom, or generate revenue, or both. And yes, some are quite loud and insist on using others’ forums (Youtube, etc.)to sell their wares. Hey, Al Gore still applies! :)
How about that…?
I think Twitter as a privately owned company can choose not to do business with someone, but the rules should apply to ALL customers. All the way up to and including the baking of a cake for customers they want to serve. AJ (and AG) should well be able to fund their own servers, and purchase ads on other sites to promote their agenda and thoughts, like everyone else. They have followers that spread the word too, and a word of mouth customer beats any amount of ads. You, as the consumer, have the ability to go to those sites, or ignore them. A powerful freedom that thankfully still exists. If you insist on surfing the social media sites, then you are ok with being the product on offer to other entities that purchase you and your thoughts for profit elsewhere. Again, Your choice as well. Great country we still live in, yes? There is actual freedom of choice left in many things (though not enough for me by any means.)
Phil: You are correct on Al Gore who has become a billionaire from his Climate Change Agenda & still heats his swimming pool with electricity & has one of the highest monthly personal energy bills in the world.
Click,click,pull. Must all be Catholic
Political parties are street gangs run by lawyers. Trying to debate freedom of political speech is a little like being a cheerleader for street gang warfare. The debate tends to get a little loud and overly heated.
I don’t like what the social media, communication, and data mining tech companies are doing to this country. This problem was started a long time ago by secret squirrels, pornographers and advertisers looking for more control without public scrutiny. The partisan gangs are late-comers to the tech boom, and slow learners as well, but they know how to exploit their marks. You can probably come up with more guilty parties to add to my list.
Not all martyrs are saints. Jones is not the only victim; he is just the loudest.
The real question should be “how do we reign the tech bastards in along with their hidden and public sponsors?”.
I sometimes wonder.. what is it Alex Jones was talking about that brought up the censors.. I guess I never paid much attention to him.. then this.. for all times I said everyone hides things in plain sight.. let everyone know what is going on.. put just enough of an odd spin on it so everyone says.. oh that is a bunch of bunk.. then discredit it.. now what was he talking about that made them freak out.. he’s been talking for years like he has..
George I spend a lot of time on the internet looking for a better way for me. Sure seems to be paying off in spades. But when you brought up Alex Jones I had to go to google to find out who you were talking about.
https://youtu.be/bGDCySrfZQE
ark,ark,ark.
https://www.qproofs.com/
Click on the bottom left YouTube video on this website
hi https://youtu.be/NAMYAoiCSsI
Forbidden cancer cures by the globalist
Alex Jones has not lost his freedom of speech in any way. He’s free to speak and he does. Social media platforms are not a right, they are a privilege. When you create an account you agree to a terms of service. When you violate the terms of service as Alex Jones has, then they have the right to ban your account. It’s really that simple.
Facebook, Twitter, Apple, YouTube are not basic human rights. They are not the only places to communicate on the internet. They are more like gated communities with many rules set in place to keep order.
Let’s face the facts, Alex Jones is a loudmouth a$$ spreading his BS to sell products on his website in order to profit. That’s the bottom line here. He still has more than enough freedom to say and do whatever he wants. Nobody has truly censored him from speaking.
Whether you realize it, or not, you present the same argument proposed by racists who in the 1960’s said “They still have access to their bathrooms” and you’re saying that Jones should be shut out of what’s an otherwise open club – a public accommodation? Running on the publicly funded internet?
Facebook and other “social media” ARE public (communications) accommodations, or at least have been represented as such. I daresay if they had gone public as “left-agenda, dividers promoting gender change and the denigration of traditional Western values..Oh, and we promote Trump=Hating.” they would not have flourished.
They need to commit to open or have the courtesy to publish their political/social ag3enda.
Here’s a draft to kick around:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Communist_Manifesto
Thanks for commenting back George. Your point about segregation in the 60’s is a bit of a reach imo. Apples-Oranges.
Alex Jones was banned for his TOS violations, not for his skin color. Also, take into consideration Alex Jones as a corporation, InfoWars. He’s not representing himself so much as his business interests. He’s not been a sole entity for quite some time.
I used to like hearing him bark years ago when it felt legitimate. He’s crossed into something entirely different now.
For the record, I do not like TOS banning or censorship of any kind, but a company has the right to refuse service if you violate their terms, no? He’s certainly not the first person that’s been banned, perhaps the most public. For sure, it’s a slippery slope, gray area as most of these types of things are.
Nobody is preventing him from saying anything. His freedom is entirely in tact. He could even make an account under a different name and say whatever he wanted if he chooses. He just wouldn’t have his army of followers to hear him.
Perhaps there should be legislation of reform to control or categorize large social platforms and deem them public free speech zones, but until that happens they are just corporate services with TOS and moderators. Of course there will be bias.
Your last statement about their platforms not flourishing if we’d known about a bias is also arguable as a perspective issue. I see as much right leaning as left leaning on FB. Division is a 2-way road.
The pendulum swings. Clinton, Bush, Obama, Trump. I’m seeing all the same hatred for Trump as I saw with Obama, just happening in reverse now. It’ll swing back the other way when there’s a non-Republican President elected, it always does. Just like sports teams, politics is meant to be divisive. But that doesn’t mean we all need to over-react.
Maybe we’re more used to being surrounded by people like ourselves with similar thoughts. When we see different perspectives it’s difficult to imagine how someone could feel that way as it does not align with our thinking and peer groups. The guy on the right is offended by the left and vice versa. A platform that globally bridges all people from rural to urban is going to ruffle some feathers.
Perhaps we all need to recognize our differences and embrace them. I’d be willing to bet we’d all get along fine if we got to know one another a little better over a glass of whiskey rather than spew hateful garbage intended to get a negative reaction, not to mention more likes and energy supplement sales.
Lastly! Keep this in mind. The one guy who has the ability to start WW3 with a single tweet has not been kicked off Twitter. I’d argue inciting a war is a TOS violation. ;) Tell me it’s not all about the bottom line for Twitter. It’s all business in the end for them. Left, right… Money always wins.
As always – the Urban motto – everything’s a business model- fills all the divides!