They're afraid of being viewed as supporting, in any way, idiots like you.
Apple Has Threatened to Pull Twitter From App Store, Musk Claims
- Thread starter abby97
- Start date
They're not afraid of anything, they just don't want Musk bringing his garbage to their platform.
I vote with my wallet. Free speech has its constraints. You should read something about the 1st amendment sometime. Might enlighten you and your ilk.Another true American free speech supporter.
Whose platform? Maybe you haven't heard, Musk owns Twitter so it is his platform.
There should never be restraints on free speech outside of physical harm, your delicate feelings don't count.
Maybe, and I'm just spitballing here, the platforms have decided that (1) their advertisers probably don't want their ads appearing with posts that show porn, use foul language, praise Hitler, and argue for the assassination of politicians and the downfall of the United States; and (2) they will have more readers for their advertisers to sell to, and thus higher ad income, if they minimize these garbage posts.
Just a guess.
So you believe the Jewish deli must allow swastikas to be displayed on their bulletin boards, correct?
Crickets ensue.
Supporting what, freedom, a plurality of ideas, fresh concepts? How dangerous...........
Ah, but he has to be allowed to have his platform in their App Store. Do you think Chik-Fil-A should sell a Chicken Sandwich geared towards people who approve of same-sex marriage? I don't believe they should and I can choose to not eat at Chik-Fil-A because they don't. It goes against their views as an organization. Why do you feel it's illegal for Chik-Fil-A to not sell a SSM sandwich?
I see, your problem is you don't understand all the pieces to the environment. Now I see why you're so confused.
The phone itself is a platform, which Musk doesn't own. I could go on, but you won't understand. You might want to stay out of this argument because you really are coming across as the dumbest poster on this board.
That's what he just posted - he's fine with all speech other than threats.
So he's fine with fraud, with defamation, with child porn, with incitement ...
That's interesting, if that was all that was being withheld, you would not find many contrarians including me. But when you withhold news stories about Hunter Biden's laptop, possible dangerous side effects of MRNA vaccines, stories on the amount of illegal aliens streaming across the border, etc. those are a far cry from Hitler and assassination attempts, but nice try. I'm just just spitt balling,,,,,,,,,,
I sure hope they're not withholding mental health stories because you sure need help.
That's all you got, comparing swastikas on a deli to hiding news stories on social media because leftists don't like them? I'm sorry you have jumped the shark.
Now we see the real reason abby's panties are in a wad.
LOL - backpedaling fast from what you posted before. To be clear, no private entity should be forced to display ANY messages they don't want to. THAT'S free speech.
Don’t you have an anti interracial marriage rally to be at? You said free speech should not be restrained now you want it restrained. Racist hypocrite.
It sounds like you have a different opinion than the platforms on what speech to allow on *their* site.
But it’s their site and not yours. Feel feee to start your own if you have different views.
I will give you one thing - you’re not afraid to show your ass on a topic you know nothing about.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 99,189
- 208,121
- 113
Why should any company feel compelled to keep advertising on Twitter if they can't be assured there is robust content moderation and adequate customer service from sales staff?
Musk has gutted the moderation staff and the ad sales staff. If I were in charge of a company that advertised on Twitter I damn sure would also suspend my spending until I was satisfied I would have adequate sales support and that my brand wouldn't get a black eye due to Twitter not properly moderating content.
That's just smart business.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 99,189
- 208,121
- 113
I'll answer your (as usual, stupid) question:
They do it because it is good for business.
Unlike you, most normal people prefer their social media experience to be free of racist hate speech and will not continue to participate on platforms that allow it. It is in their economic interest to moderate how they see fit in order to increase users and thus advertising.
Why do you hate capitalism?
Or, why should any company feel compelled to keep advertising on Twitter for any reason?
I bet abby is so pissed when everyone but Nike and EA Sports left Tiger Woods after his affairs and issues. I mean who the F are they to not want their brand associated with that? It's his free speech right to bang whoever he wants, whenever he wants.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 99,189
- 208,121
- 113
Reading isn't the issue. Comprehension on the other hand.
Would be hilarious to see social influencers who generate income primarily through Twitter lose it. Which is more important integrity or their wallet.
You can argue that the Apple, Google, and Amazon app stores are private companies but they have crossed this threshold where they are the gatekeepers of the internet. They may be private but they have control of the public square. Special rules need to be applied to them.
Maybe if the USA enforced anti trust laws again. You'd have a point. Unfortunately all of that has been tossed to the curb. In the race to the bottom.
I don't think you understand the internet very well. You don't need an app to do things. A good responsive web site will allow you to do many of the same things. It's not like these companies are restricting which web sites can be accessed.
Oh still haven’t upgraded your vocabulary. The racist Abby thinks it is pretty smart, but we all know you don’t even have your grade 10.
You really shouldn't be critical of others, you are the guy who thought Musk owns all the phones.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
Jaxx DeJean Creating His Own Path, Forging Relationships with Iowa
- Latest: Eliot Clough
-
-
-
