Tuesday, August 7, 2018

How to Make Conspiracy Theorists Look Sane

Instapundit observes:
INFOWARS BANNED BY APPLE, FACEBOOK, YOUTUBE, SPOTIFY, ALL WITHIN 24 HOURS: Lesson one in undermining conspiracy theorists is not doing stuff to them that looks a whole lot like a conspiracy.
Alex Jones is a serious problem promoting various bizarre conspiracy theories about 9/11 and Newtown.  But the solution to wrong speech is more speech, not less.  As long as I can find Holocaust denier videos on YouTube, they aren't serious about their reasons.

Roger Simon pointed me to this apparent explanation of why Holocaust deniers are okay at 7/20/18 CNET.  Zuckerberg explains:
content from Holocaust deniers should not be taken down from the platform because "I don't think that they're intentionally getting it wrong," he said.
"It's hard to impugn intent and to understand the intent," he continued. "I just think, as abhorrent as some of those examples are, I think the reality is also that I get things wrong when I speak publicly."
But he understands Alex Jones' intent?  Anyone who can't figure out the intent of the Holocaust deniers is pretty dense.


tkc said...

Slightly related: "Amazon's U.S. seller policies ban "items that Amazon deems offensive," which include products "that promote or glorify hatred, violence, racial, sexual or religious intolerance or promote organizations with such views.""

I'm okay with this. Amazon has no responsibility to provide a market place for white supremacy. That said, if you don't want to promote or glorify hatred then why are the still selling Che Guevara t-shirts? That is hypocrisy.

James Gibson said...

I agree with you on so many things: but on this issue I can't. Alex Jones is as bad as those against him, in that he will only bring on people that support the stories he is promoting. In short he is as much against the 1st amendment as Antifa and Soreos. The biggest problem is that not only dooes he help prevent people with "lets say alternative" information from speaking publicly, people like Gllenn Beck and even Michael Savage have begun presenting his stories. What was the adage, say a lie enough times and it becomes a truth.

And we can't argue against facebook's right to support or reject certain postings. If it wasn't for their controls (however bias they may be) facebook would be worse then Craigs list by now. I have had young women in scanty attire show up in my Facebook line only to thankfully have them deleted very quickly by the system. And why do I get them, I am over 50 and I am unmarried thanks to the Facebook profile.

Clayton Cramer said...

Facebook certainly has the right to exclude Alex Jones, but pretending to pure and non-political motives is dishonest. Yes, infowars claimed a fire last year in Santa Rosa was started by an illegal alien, with no evidence and likely just as clickbait. But like Holocaust deniers, our best hope is to fight lies with truth. The left can't handle that concept.

Will said...

where do YOU want the line drawn? You can be sure it won't be anywhere near where they will end up putting it. Since they are pretty much a monopoly at this point, they should not be allowed to do it. They only want Leftists/Progressives to be able to talk. THAT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE

Clayton Cramer said...

Social media create ignorance by giving the illusion of knowledge to the lazy and those prone to peer pressure. Not sure where antitrust law fits here, but the pretense of protecting us from Alex Jones but not from Holocaust deniers sticks in my craw.

Eskyman said...

This media censorship is unidirectional. No lefties are censored or banned, no matter how offensive their material is. ISIS is free to post repulsive content promoting their interpretation of islam, and that racist Sarah Jeong recently hired at NYT is free to post her hateful tweets about how she'd like to eliminate all white people.

Candace Owens, who is a young black woman conservative, found her Twitter account shut down when she posted some of the exact same tweets as Jeong, only with the word "white" replaced by "black" or "jewish." Later on Twitter said that was a "mistake" and reinstated her account; but Jeong's account was never shut down at all. Racism, intolerance, violence, "hate speech,"- it's all OK when the Left does it, but never ever the Right.

This is all aimed at the Right. If you want freedom of speech on these platforms, you'd better start fighting for it, because the Left means business and they want us gone!

Will said...

is there another label that might be more accurate, at least for some people? Something like, Holocaust Diminish-er or Modifier? That 6M number has already been admitted to be a fake, by the people who made it up. They have admitted that they chose that number for the sympathy it drummed up. As more time has passed since the war, further research just keeps lowering the estimated number. The latest figures I've seen currently put it in the range of 1.2M-1.8M. I'm wondering where the floor is. I am driven to prefer accuracy in data (Asperger's Syndrome), and the subject has puzzled me ever since I first read about it in the early 60's. So many discrepancies in the history that it just raised flags from the start. I expect some of that in war histories, but so much doesn't add up it is frustrating. I mostly ignored it for decades due to this problem, but now it seems people are willing to look at the subject with less of the traditional mindset coloring the view.

Just as the Progressives have altered the worlds' perception of the actual political makeup of the Nazis, too many people trumpeting a somewhat modified view of actual history has muddied the waters and done the world no favors by piling on the bad guys. It so overwhelms other atrocities that they tend to get lost because of it. The Turkish slaughter of the Armenians is an example of this. A good example of clearing up history is discovering that the Russians killed the Polish military officers in that Forest instead of it being the Nazis.
Don't make the mistake of thinking that I'm pro Nazi. Not at all. Like I said, I want accuracy in reports. I see no benefit in altering info. That just makes me wonder what else someone is hiding, and why. It's such a sad subject, and I want clarity in the view.

Random #57 said...

Facebook certainly has the right to exclude Alex Jones....

Bake the damned cake, bigot!

Sorry, that right of freedom from association is long gone, along with segregated lunch counters.

Clayton Cramer said...

Will: I have seen no evidence that the 6 million Jews (or 12 million total) is too high. I have seen reasons to think the 13 million number conflated Soviet extermination of collaborators and nationalists after the Nazi retreat. Where is this supposed admission that the 6 million number was intentionally false?

Random: Segregated lunch counters fell under authority of federal law because police enforcement of trespass law was a use of state government power, and thus subject to 14th Amendment incorporation. Many of the segregation practices were not individual choices but government mandates (Plessy v. Ferguson, the train and bus segregation statutes litigated after World War II, the separate but unequal public schools).

Refusing to bake a cake involves use of government power only in punishing the baker. He did not have police drag the couple from his business.

If gay couples want cakes baked, there is no shortage of alternate providers.