Study Shows Gab And Other Social Media Help Racists

Guno צְבִי

Guno צְבִי

We fight, We win, Am Yisrael Chai
Before he attacked the Tree of Life synagogue this Saturday, the alleged Pittsburgh gunman Robert Bowers posted a message on social media. “HIAS [Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society] likes to bring invaders in that kill our people. I can’t sit by and watch my people get slaughtered,” he wrote. “Screw your optics, I’m going in.” He then carried out his threat, murdering eleven people for the crime of trying to help immigrants.

If this blatantly anti-Semitic statement of intent had been posted to Twitter or Facebook or Instagram, it might have been deleted by moderators. In fact, Bowers profile might have been deleted, since it read in part “jews are the children of satan.” But Bowers didn’t need to be concerned about such censorship because he wasn’t using Facebook or Instagram. He was using the social media platform Gab.

https://forward.com/opinion/413143/study-shows-gab-and-other-social-media-help-racists/
 
I'm not sure why you'd want to censor him unless you're a censor, but Hitler was also roundly censored before he and his ilk came to power. Weimar Germany had pretty modern hate speech laws—insulting communities of faith (including jews) was prohibited by law—and Nazi propagandists were jailed on several occasions. Little good it did. This type of legislation and censorship proved ineffectual on the one occasion when there was a real argument for it
 
Heff said:
I'm not sure why you'd want to censor him unless you're a censor, but Hitler was also roundly censored before he and his ilk came to power. Weimar Germany had pretty modern hate speech laws—insulting communities of faith (including jews) was prohibited by law—and Nazi propagandists were jailed on several occasions. Little good it did. This type of legislation and censorship proved ineffectual on the one occasion when there was a real argument for it
Click to expand...

He never said anything about censoring, would should happen is these sites should be recognized for what they are, signaled out as hate sites, and that has to be done by the right, otherwise, individuals as the shooter and bomber will dismiss it as fake news.

What is happening instead, is that the right wing media with demogogues as Rush, Sean, and the rest are reinforcing their message, not as blatantly, but legitimizing the irrationalities thru innuendo and half baked conspiracies
 
archives said:
He never said anything about censoring, would should happen is these sites should be recognized for what they are, signaled out as hate sites, and that has to be done by the right, otherwise, individuals as the shooter and bomber will dismiss it as fake news.

What is happening instead, is that the right wing media with demogogues as Rush, Sean, and the rest are reinforcing their message, not as blatantly, but legitimizing the irrationalities thru innuendo and half baked conspiracies
Click to expand...

I assumed we were talking about censorship, perhaps wrongly, because demagogues like Howard Dean are saying Gab AI should be tried as an accomplice to murder. That's the road we're walking down with this inquisition of "violent rhetoric". No, they should not be signalled out as "hate sites".
 
Heff said:
I assumed we were talking about censorship, perhaps wrongly, because demagogues like Howard Dean are saying Gab AI should be tried as an accomplice to murder. That's the road we're walking down with this inquisition of "violent rhetoric". No, they should not be signalled out as "hate sites".
Click to expand...

Yes, they are hate sites, and since corporations are now "people," GAB can be tried as an accomplice to murder.
 
Kacper said:
So? Better they congregate in their own little gardens than contaminate the rest of the internet
Click to expand...

Why? This permits their aggressive rhetoric to be enhanced and agreed upon by other haters.,There are no opposing views permitted. We have lots of haters and right wing white power types here. But we can debate them and laugh at them.
 
archives said:
He never said anything about censoring, would should happen is these sites should be recognized for what they are, signaled out as hate sites, and that has to be done by the right, otherwise, individuals as the shooter and bomber will dismiss it as fake news.

What is happening instead, is that the right wing media with demogogues as Rush, Sean, and the rest are reinforcing their message, not as blatantly, but legitimizing the irrationalities thru innuendo and half baked conspiracies
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, there are too many sites that have people regularly posting racial and ethnic slurs.

JPP...is one of those sites.
 
Nordberg said:
Why? This permits their aggressive rhetoric to be enhanced and agreed upon by other haters.,There are no opposing views permitted. We have lots of haters and right wing white power types here. But we can debate them and laugh at them.
Click to expand...

Calling each other names and patting yourselves on the back doesn't really seem like debate to me, but perhaps there is a section to JPP that hasn't unlocked for me after 14 months.
 
guno said:
snip

If this blatantly anti-Semitic statement of intent had been posted to Twitter or Facebook or Instagram, it might have been deleted by moderators. In fact, Bowers profile might have been deleted, since it read in part “jews are the children of satan.” But Bowers didn’t need to be concerned about such censorship because he wasn’t using Facebook or Instagram. He was using the social media platform Gab.

https://forward.com/opinion/413143/study-shows-gab-and-other-social-media-help-racists/
Click to expand...

Apparentl GAB, Stormfront, and JustPlainPolitics are really the only type of places on the interwebs that allows anything to go; any kind of degenerate racism and anti-Semitism is allowed, tolerated, and welcomed with open arms.

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/s...or-the-Republican-Party&p=2688389#post2688389

Social media and message boards are private property that are not within the purview of free speech and censorship.
I personally think it speaks to having good character to ban racists, sexists, and anti-Semites from one's private property.
 
Nordberg said:
Why? This permits their aggressive rhetoric to be enhanced and agreed upon by other haters.,There are no opposing views permitted. We have lots of haters and right wing white power types here. But we can debate them and laugh at them.
Click to expand...

Far more white haters on JPP then any other political forum .....
 
Cypress said:
Apparentl GAB, Stormfront, and JustPlainPolitics are really the only type of places on the interwebs that allows anything to go; any kind of degenerate racism and anti-Semitism is allowed, tolerated, and welcomed with open arms.

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/s...or-the-Republican-Party&p=2688389#post2688389

Social media and message boards are private property that are not within the purview of free speech and censorship.
I personally think it speaks to having good character to ban racists, sexists, and anti-Semites from one's private property.
Click to expand...

Blame Al Gore. He invented the internet (among other things)
 
archives said:
He never said anything about censoring, would should happen is these sites should be recognized for what they are, signaled out as hate sites, and that has to be done by the right, otherwise, individuals as the shooter and bomber will dismiss it as fake news.

What is happening instead, is that the right wing media with demogogues as Rush, Sean, and the rest are reinforcing their message, not as blatantly, but legitimizing the irrationalities thru innuendo and half baked conspiracies
Click to expand...
Then so should every other site on the Internet and TV shows. Facebook, Twitter, the View etc. all bastions of BLM and Antifa terrorist propaganda. Inspiring such loons as the shooter at the ball field, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top