Twitter, Murder, Facebook discussed on The Situation with Michael Brown


Sure his instagram account. Everything else is gonna be shut down. If even hasn't already And then I also noticed during the break. Yeah, I'm not. I'm not an android guys, so I don't really pay any attention to the Google APP store. But apparently Google has indeed taken parlor, which is a Twitter alternative off if that store The parlor is a conservative alternative to Twitter. It's a little clunky. Its user interface, I think is Pretty primitive. And it's got some Room to grow. And personally, I don't like Twitter or ah, parlor all that much, because if you talk about an echo chamber There's really not much dissent there, so it's hard to engage with people of opposing points of view so that you can have a fun debate. Get into a Twitter war like I tend to do occasionally. But my point about Trump being the platform today. One shouldn't be surprising. Because big text censorship I'm that's not new. All the social media companies that were at one point the you think back at the beginning of Facebook and Twitter. They were really reluctant. They tried to not become Sensors or arbiters of the truth. They wanted to stay out of it. They truly just wanted to be a platform. No, Zucker Burg was just originally, You know, Think about those of you have been around Facebook long enough. Remember? Facebook in its early years was all about used to drive me crazy. All these games. You were inviting you to play games, play farm or plays Powell's or something. I forget what it was. It was just dumb ass stuff. Twitter when it's in its Infancy. Was really kind of stupid stuff like you know, Today, I had a hamburger for lunch. Really? Wow. Glad to know that. So I think the infancy Kind of the new disciples platforms. Because they wanted to grow. I mean, these were publicly traded companies so they needed ad revenue. They get ad revenue, they needed people to participate. I mean, who wants to buy an ad on Twitter? If you only have a million followers are a million people engaged in your platform for you know, 25 million people involved. Well, they wanted to stay out of it. And that Woz, I think the right thing to do They shouldn't be sensors or the arbiters of truth. But they have increasingly clamp down on what they think is hate speech misinformation. And that's what bothers me. Probably more than anything else, just as I despise the concept of a hate crime. If I murder someone If I take it and just bludgeon someone to death With malice aforethought and I do it in such a gruesome way that ability particulars can be filed so that the prosecutor can seek the death penalty against me. That's the crime. If I and if the prosecution is successful And I'm found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Then I'm found guilty. More likely than not at the sentencing hearing. I'll be sentenced to death. For gruesome murder. Now, let's say That for whatever reason. I hate I hate Asians. So what I'm gonna do is I'm gonna go bludgeoned to death. Somebody that's of Asian descent. And as I'm doing it Yell out epithets about Asians as I am doing the exact same thing. The Nets considered a hate crime. Well. It's still it's still the same crime. What if I Him in committing that crime. Gave no indication that I was doing first of all to murder someone There's gonna be hate in your heart where you're gonna be just out of your freaking mind. But If I if I did it, too. If me is a white guy did it to a nation God But I never gave any indication anywhere of a hatred for Asians. I didn't yell out in the epitaphs that somebody was hearing as I was bludgeoning someone to death. What's the difference? It's a murder. It's a capital murder case. And whether I did it with hate in my heart or not hate in my heart or prejudice in my heart or not prejudiced In my heart. It's still the crime and, if duly convicted beyond a reasonable doubt and sentenced to death, it's the same outcome. But we decided that we want to somehow virtue signal. By taking on hate crimes. And as I always warned about hate crimes when you would eventually morph into hate speech. That's hate speech. I grew up in law school, and I grew up in the time in the sixties. Where we recognized That even the most vile speech was protected by the First Amendment, And quite frankly, it still is. But we're slowly morphing into this idea that somehow hate speech is not protected by the first Amendment. That is the very speech that must be protected by the First Amendment. Why You tell me Who do you want to be the arbiter? Of what's hate speech or not hate speech. You want me to do it? I don't want you to do it. I don't even know you, but I want you to do it. I know you and I certainly don't want you to do it. So this concept of these tech giants now becoming arbiters of what they deem to be hate speech or misinformation to think about misinformation. Misinformation all over all over the place. There's always been misinformation and disinformation. You know how you counter misinformation and disinformation with accurate information. But I think as a society we reached the point where we don't want to live in that kind of world That's just too much trouble. I'd rather have somebody else and that somebody else has usually been the government. We want the government to control, disinformation and misinformation and hate speech. And now that's morphed into you want that? Tech giants to do it. We always want somebody else. To do the job that we should be doing as citizens. And I think that's why This is incredibly dangerous. The traffic.

Coming up next