A funny Alex Jones update of where he is available on the internet.
Check out @JAdomian’s Tweet:
https://twitter.com/JAdomian/status/1038324839856013312?s=09



On Thu, Aug 9, 2018, 4:01 PM Steve Timko <[email protected]> wrote:

> Some Twitter content pulled after coverage by CNN.
>
> LINK
> <http://thehill.com/policy/technology/401170-some-alex-jones-removed-from-twitter-after-being-mentioned-by-cnn>
>
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 10:53 PM Steve Timko <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> They don't have to provide the audience. Merely a chance to reach them.
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 9:33 PM Kevin M. <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 8:47 PM Steve Timko <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Free speech pretty much requires an audience.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Perhaps. But there is no legal guarantee which forces a company to
>>> provide such an audience
>>>
>>> It’s not really free speech if the only place you can say it is, say, in
>>>> front of the Jehovah’s Witness Hall. So Alex Jones can proselytize as much
>>>> as he wants from his website, but as Adam noted, “to a certain generation,
>>>> access to YouTube or Facebook is tantamount to how we communicate in 2018.”
>>>> Video is probably Alex Jones’ most effective way to communicate. I followed
>>>> him daily for about three or four months about eight years ago and while he
>>>> has crazy stuff written on his website, his absolutely most batcrap crazy
>>>> stuff comes from his videos. YouTube has close to a monopoly on delivery of
>>>> video, except for what Vimeo and the porn sites. So getting kicked off
>>>> YouTube and trying to deliver a video message is almost like requiring
>>>> someone build their own sidewalk to talk to the public.
>>>> The classic defense of free speech is Milton's Areopagitica, which
>>>> argues that if truth and lies fight it out in public, truth will win.
>>>> Sadly, Jones has shown that is not true. How people believe, for instance,
>>>> that a school shooting was staged so someone could take away guns is
>>>> incomprehensible.  But as with a lot of Trump supporters, facts don’t
>>>> matter. Truth is not winning in a public forum.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 8:19 PM Doug Eastick <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> side story.....
>>>>>
>>>>> honest.... I stumbled across the story because I like music festivals
>>>>> and EDM (electronic dance music)......  I probably saw it on reddit
>>>>> /r/Coachella or something.
>>>>>
>>>>> There is a DJ that got tired of youtube taking down his 60 minutes
>>>>> videos of his sets.  youtube (or someone) claimed copyright issues.  So he
>>>>> started uploading them to pornhub.com.   I didn't bookmark the video,
>>>>> and searching for it on pornhub is not giving me the result I am seeking 
>>>>> to
>>>>> make my point, so I'll just go back to watching Big Brother now.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 11:05 PM PGage <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 9:22 AM Adam Bowie <[email protected]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The interesting things is that these companies tend to be quite at
>>>>>>> good at keeping some things off their sites - notably porn. Sure they 
>>>>>>> also
>>>>>>> end up banning Renaissance paintings, iconic photographs from the 
>>>>>>> Vietnam
>>>>>>> war, and mothers feeding their babies. But the algorithms seem 
>>>>>>> reasonably
>>>>>>> good at identifying bare skin.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, I feel like this actually supports my side of the argument. When
>>>>>> FB censors classic art, historically important photographs and images of
>>>>>> breastfeeding mothers, I do feel like it is an unjustified limitation on
>>>>>> free speech. If they want to ban porn fine, but put in the effort to make
>>>>>> at least some distinction between that and the other important and
>>>>>> non-pornographic representations of human nudity. And since these are 
>>>>>> fuzzy
>>>>>> categories, be prepared to err on the side of allowing a little bit of 
>>>>>> porn
>>>>>> so we don’t lose important aspects of humanity.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Again, I do insist this is about free speech, though it if helps you
>>>>>> can read that as “culture of free speech” or “free speech values” if it
>>>>>> helps distinghiush it from the First Amendment. The US Constitution
>>>>>> guarantees speech free of government interference, but it does not have a
>>>>>> monopoly on the values and culture of free expression, which is a
>>>>>> fundamental characteristic of the American Idea. I know that is not true 
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> our European cousins (I once had a long conversation with a British
>>>>>> colleague who scolded me on the American insistence on making a fetish of
>>>>>> free expression, which I took as a huge compliment).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I actually have not read any serious source who argues that banning
>>>>>> Jones violates the First Amendment so I am not sure why we are hearing 
>>>>>> this
>>>>>> being disputed so much.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Sent from Gmail Mobile
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>>> Groups "TVorNotTV" group.
>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
>>>>>> send an email to [email protected].
>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>> Groups "TVorNotTV" group.
>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>>>> an email to [email protected].
>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups "TVorNotTV" group.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>>> an email to [email protected].
>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>
>>> --
>>> Kevin M. (RPCV)
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "TVorNotTV" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> an email to [email protected].
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>
>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TVorNotTV" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to