Bill Maher criticizes social media bans: ‘Alex Jones gets to speak’

I hope the Sandy Hook moms and dads take Jones for everything he's worth. He is THE biggest piece of shit walking the face of the Earth right now, The Orange-utan included.

FFS.

Maher is NOT defending Alex Jones. He's defending content creators against corporate censorship backed by the US government. We live in an era where social media platforms are corporate behemoths. Google is an information monopoly. And Alex Jones is not the only person getting banned. These companies, like Twitter, are also suspending accounts of Left wing commentators. Big Tech has never, is not and will never be our friend. We need to understand that.

I doubt our forefathers envisioned free speech to include social media whores who create lies in order to gain clicks.

Wrong, R3. R2 is the only sane one on here it seems.

R2 is fucking idiots. You just threw government in there. Jones violate the terms of service. He got constant warnings. You’re a fucking worthless liar. Go hop in a grease fire with the rest of the deplorables, dummy.

R4 is R2.

Maher is a fucking hero. I don't always agree with him but he has been calling it like it is for decades. He is very smart and doesn't take bullshit. Not saying he is perfect but I'm thankful he is on the left.

R7 is thrilled he said the n word.

R5 is a fucking idiot. This isn't just about Alex Jones you asshat. Platforms like Twitter, You Tube and Facebook have been suspending Left wing accounts as well - Like The Amazing Athiest on Twitter (who's progressive), Peter Douche (that was a parody account and THEY SAID SO IN THE DESCRIPTION) and Caitlin Johnstone. I remember a few years ago when Black owned accounts that fought against racism were getting banned. Even Matt Taibbi just did an article about how many non-Alex Jones like accounts are being punished by these companies.

Well then R5 is correct. We're dealing with public corporations who have the right to control content on their sites. If you were a shareholder of one of these companies and they continued to lose value because they strayed from their charter then they have every right to protect their investors and abide by the inital structure set forth in the charter.

Businesses have the right to ban to ban you. What the fuck don’t you pinheads not understand?! Go start your own fucking websites. Jones should have been taking off years ago. He broke every fucking rule known to man. Those platforms would have been named in lawsuits. You don’t have a constitutional right to a Facebook account. Fuck off.

Businesses have the right ban you. What the fuck don’t you pinheads understand?! Go start your own fucking websites. Jones should have been taken off years ago. He broke every fucking rule known to man. Those platforms would have been named in lawsuits. You don’t have a constitutional right to a Facebook account. Fuck off.

SO why can't Mr. Jones just buy his own site. No one's stopping him.

I love Maher, but he's wrong here. As others have said, FB, Insta and the rest have terms of service. No one is forced to use them. Jones chose to, but didn't play by the rules.

So, he got banned for a bit.

This has nothing to do with free speech.

Does he really believe Sandy Hook didn't happen? What does he think happened? Where did the kids go?

Bill Maher is right about a lot of things.

He could not be more wrong about this.

Fuck Alex Jones. He does not deserve any sort of mass-media platform for his lies and conspiracies and inciting of violence.

Alex Jones is a fraud and a con-man and an insane person. He should be locked up and gagged. Throw away the key. Straight-jacket all the way.

Or an even worse punishment, R16, would be to send Jones back to obscurity.

r15 Of course Alex does NOT believe any of his bullshit. But he gets paid handsomely for spewing lies.

I've always thought I should go into the "crazy conservative bullshitter" world. It would be so easy to make a ton of money. That base is ravenous for crazy shit. They will shell out every last bit of their welfare/meth money for it.

An Open Secret seems to think he’s true, as they regularly endorse him and added a red x to their name when he got shadow banned. Not surprisingly, their reward for associating with PizzaGate mongers was to get shadow banned

This guy is ugly inside and out. Why is he being given chance after chance when he’s disliked so much?

I thought their main attraction was the ability to say whatever you want. Even the Little Guy could say something. If not we'd be back to newspapers and their filtered editorials.

So when is he gonna have Alex on now that he’s been banned from Twitter and Apple?

Bill's dying for a bearable libertarian candidate, to prove he's not a wussy liberal. It's not like he hides it .

Social media is a business. Don't look up to businesses for moral guidance. I mean, haven't we learn that lesson with religion and their child molesting authority figures?

I refuse to keep up with the Kardashians and I refuse to keep up with the likes of Trump, Sarah Palin, Alex Jones, Milo Y. etc. Unfortunately the stupid need to be protected and reminded that the likes of Trump and Alex Jones are not good for them and their sanity like stupid brats who cry for candy because it's just right there at the cash register at the local supermarket.

R15 That's like saying, "What doe you mean the white man fucked over the Indians and stole lots of valuable land from the,. What happened?"

It's all available online but you have to do your own legwork.

Maher is quite right.

He's right that nuts get to speak but I like these social media bans because it brings them closer to regulation.

People need to see for themselves how much of an asshole Alex Jones is. Apparently people need proof for that every single day.

You guys do realize that the internet is more than Google, Facebook and Twitter right? You can't complain they control the information when you're too lazy to use the thousands of alternatives.

Maher only wants people like Jones to have a venue to spread his bile so that Maher will have material for his own shtick. He doesn't give a fat rat's ass about Jones.

Agreed R30.

the danger in banning anyone for free speech is that if someone decides to come after you next it has just been made a lot easier.

Is this free speech?

Twitter is a private entity, no? They’re rules.

Is this free speech?

Why yes, yes it is. Free speech is not about saying whatever you want consequence free. Never has been, it’s about the government not telling you what you can say.

There is no constitutional amendment guaranteeing freedom of tweet.

Social media isn’t the government is it?

That's why guys like the Deplorables and Maher are idiots, because this isn't an issue about free speech. It's about corporate interest calling the shots what their platforms are being used for. Of course the Deplorables would be the first ones to cry foul if Fox News would be forced by Big Government to be actually fair and balanced.

I’m on the fence about Bill Maher. Going back decades to Politically Incorrect, freedom to offend jas been probably his most consistent position. Back then, he was a libertarian who hated George W Bush and who liberal people loved even though he had that creepy flirtation with Ann Coulter (and later Maureen Dowd) that contributed to her fame and grew her following.

Over time, he became a mouthpiece for several other strong positions: Aggressive anti-religious/anti-spiritual politically motivated atheism, marijuana legalization, and hatred for Islamic people, the last of which turned me off.

And then what was once an idea to say anything that is politically correct became a crusade for him five or six years ago, as he announced he would no longer tour universities because they don’t allow offensive humor. He had lots of guests on to complain about this. Then Milo Yiannopoulos surfaced, representing the neo-Nazi white-supremacist alt-right, and saying what Maher said about speech on campus. He taunted women who had been raped by walking around on college campuses that said “rape culture = Harry Potter - both fantasy,” etc. Maher had Yiannopoulos on and seemed like he wanted to make out with him during the interview. To me it was perverse. After the interview, Maher said Yiannopoulos is “reasonable,” and he invited him back on the show immediately. Maher completely ignored Yiannopoulos’s white supremacist views and affiliations, his whites-only college scholarship, he allowed Yiannopoulos to misrepresent statistics on air that made it sound like transgender people are disproportionately purveyors of sexual assaults when in reality they are disproportionately victims of sexual assaults. Maher let all that go because Yiannopoulos spewed rhetoric that agrees with Maher’s: universities are dooming America by being too PC, Muslims are all murderers, etc. Maher defended that interview and invited Y back on immediately. Days later the two videos of Y endorsing pedophilia came out, Y’s career collapsed, abd Maher took credit for it.

Bill Maher has lost most of the respect I once had for him. I agree with a lot of what he says, but I also think he is an extremist in too many ways: his I’m-cool-because-I-smoke-weed schtick is archaic; his Muslims-are-all-evil schtick is simply wrong; his love of giving a platform to Yiannopoulos, Coulter, Dowd, anyone who says anything that agrees with one of his points even when they do a lot of damage with their rhetoric is fucked up; the way he gets pissed off at his audience when he tells an unfunny joke and they don’t laugh is sad. I can’t stand Andy Cohen anymore, but his interview with Cohen was embarrassing and offensive; Maher may has well have prefaced every question he asked with, “So as a flaming faggot, what do you think about...?”

It’s time for Bill Maher to retire and smoke as much weed off camera at the Playboy mansion as his heart desires. He’s old and outmoded. He has brought a lot of important topics into common currency, but at this point I feel like he is out of touch and has become one of those hippies who got old and became ultra-conservative without being aware of it.

There is a difference between paying money to be entertained by a stand-up comedian and pay good money to a snake oil salesmen selling you fear, anger and toxic pills through infowars.

He is right. The cost of free speech is that everyone gets to speak. If we start censoring Alex Jones, who is next? Just because you don't like what he says doesn't mean he should not get to say it.

R40 Anyone is free to stand on a literal soapbox in a public square and say whatever they want. Not everyone is free to say what they want via a private online company anymore than anyone is free to say what they want in the New York Times or via Fox News. No one complains that news editors and producers censor by not putting every person with any opinion in their pages or on their TV networks.

I love the Deplorable drama about "free speech". Shows what hypocritical idiots they are.

Exactly

“Freedom of speech” is NOT “guarantee of platform”

That has to be stated and often to block this idea that every platform is yours to say what ever you want with no repurcussions. Stand on a street corner and yell crap and if someone knocks you down? Well that wasn’t government censorship. It was living in the reality of a shared world.

He will likely lose the defamation suit brought by the Sandy Hook families. That will seal the fate of Alex fucking Jones.

I agree that the principle that a private company can set its own rules is, in most cases, the correct position. However, It's not such a simple problem when the private companies become the de facto town square.

Many of the same people happy to see Alex Jones banned are incensed when a baker refuses to bake a cake for lesbians. Private companies are not permitted to refuse service based on race, for example. Would you be happy if Twitter's terms of service were amended to exclude blacks? After all, it's a private company and can set its own rules, yes?

Giving people who are well known for hate and lies is not my idea of "free speech". It's providing a venue for propaganda. I had stopped watch Bill Maher's show for a while now because he has known liars and hatemongers like Ann Coulter and Milo whateverhisname as guests.

PENIS NOSE can fuck right off.

Penis Nose is a typical libertarian sociopath using the "free speech" card to ask the American public to bend over for the trolls and hatemongers who've completely overtaken almost every major social media and website platform and have actually manipulated referendums and elections. Libertarians don't care about social irresponsibility, so of course he would stump for a crazy person who helped spread Russian propaganda during the 2016 election, and keeps inciting nut jobs to commit violence against innocent people.

I agree with r40. I want to know what the other side thinks. I don't want them censored. How do most of you go through life been triggered by the other side extreme views. It seems like some of you have terrible coping mechanisms.

[quote]Many of the same people happy to see Alex Jones banned are incensed when a baker refuses to bake a cake for lesbians. Private companies are not permitted to refuse service based on race, for example. Would you be happy if Twitter's terms of service were amended to exclude blacks?

Jones wasn’t banned due to political ideology, race, gender, and so on, shit for brains. He was spreading liable. He broke the terms of service.

[QUOTE]I want to know what the other side thinks. I don't want them censored.

😂 Spare us the bullshit. The “other side” isn’t going anywhere. You want to know what they think? Then turn on Fox News or visit any number of their shitty blogs.

“I want to know what the other side thinks. I don't want them censored.”

Then seek out what the other side thinks. No one is under any obligation to serve it up on a platinum platter. I am a freelance writer. I have to work hard to convince editors my words are worth sharing. People should not be handed influential platforms for their ideas simply because their ideas are the most radical and offensive. That’s insane. There is no facual basis behind the insane notions that Alex Jones promotes. If he can argue any sane, solid case based on facts and truth, then he will find a home for his words. Making up insane shit, calling people names, and lying about people who have been victimized does not earn him the right to national media presence.

Did he check the little box that stated terms of service? If so, then he's got nothing to stand on. No one is entitled to a platform when it comes to free speech. Even the editor of your local newspaper knows this.

The issue is knowingly making false accusations and incitement to abuse of the Sandy Hook victims' families. Not sure the first amendment completely protects all that in all cases; we're not talking about unwelcome or offensive opinions being banned by the government. Certainly he violated the terms use of his social media platform, and those terms of use are proper.

OP you should have done a poll. if you do please include a vivian vance.

[post redacted because independent.co.uk thinks that links to their ridiculous rag are a bad thing. Somebody might want to tell them how the internet works. Or not. We don't really care. They do suck though. Our advice is that you should not click on the link and whatever you do, don't read their truly terrible articles.]

[quote]SO why can't Mr. Jones just buy his own site. No one's stopping him.

He's already got one. Anyone who wants to hear him is completely free to go there.

Bill Maher tends to be really sensitive to any censorship ever since he got fired from ABC for an innocuous remark he agreed with that asshole Dinesh D'Souza made. I like Maher and I think he mostly gets things right, however, I think he goes overboard on the censorship thing.

R38Are you aware that Hugh Hefner is dead and that the heir to Starfish tuna owns the old Playboy Mansion now?

Were you in a coma and just came to?

R58 Maher still talks about smoking weed and the Playboy mansion like it’s his heyday in 1984.

Not every topic has an other side that is valid and needs to be listened to as if there is an equivalent alternative. Nazis are bad people, there is no other legitimate opinion. The US and the Allies fought a World War to defeat them. Over 60 million people died during WWII. Why is anyone in the media, or on a social network platform, or in the White House, giving them a venue to broadcast their propaganda and bigotry? Is Bill Maher to next allow pedophiles promote their agenda on their show?

R60 He had Milo on and called him very reasonable, aren’t you paying attention?

I guess Breitbart has never banned anyone from their platform. Right? Because if they did we would hear about from Maher. Right?

R57 nailed it.

*sigh*...I can't believe that after everything I wrote at R55, it got wiped out because I hyperlinked to an image at the Independent. But whatever. I'm going to try my best to remember what I said. What I said was a response to this:

[quote]I agree that the principle that a private company can set its own rules is, in most cases, the correct position. However, It's not such a simple problem when the private companies become the de facto town square.

Bullshit. Private companies have not become the de facto town square. Americans have volunteered to make them the de facto town square.

No other country in the world has done that, and you can see that in plain view. Social media exists and is used just as much in the rest of the world as in America. Yet practically every country, be it First or Third World, is exercising free speech outside of these crap platforms. Tens of thousands of Londoners came out during Trump's visit to exercise free speech. Tens of thousands of Germans recently came out to a concert to protest the Far Right. Hundreds of thousands rallied in South Korea and Romania to protest corruption. Even in India, they're holding protests and rallies.

Why haven't these private companies become the de facto town square in Germany, Romania, South Korea and all these other countries? Because they KNOW that when you get down to it, free speech has nothing to do with ranting on Twitter or Facebook. It has to do with going offline and doing what you have to do to get your voice heard. So that's what they do.They hold rallies, marches, protests and concerts. They wear protest buttons or t-shirts at events. They stand on street corners and hand out pamphlets. They start up alternative papers, magazines and newsletters. They start blogs and websites.

Americans have just as much access to these options as any other country. If it seems as if social media is the only means through which we can express ourselves and has become a de facto town square, it's because Americans have chosen to do that. It's not because it's a reality. So, to insist that we have to allow people the freedom to say whatever they want on social media because we'd lose free speech otherwise is just plain bullshit. We'd still have plenty of "free speech" without social media.

The paradox of tolerance.

The case for censoring hate speech.

Usually I would say Twitter etc.... have every right to to censor its users. Free speech is about government interference not interference from the private sector. For example the New York Times has no obligation to print an OP-ED piece that I write and submit.

However I think Maher is right in this case. Dorsey and Zuckerberg have been called to testify before Congress. That has a chilling effect on how they run their corporations.

I think the indirect censorship of social media sites by the US Congress is worth a public discussion.

If you're going to err on this question, err on the side of free speech.

Maher is a cunt but I agree with him on this.