I think they are taking censorship and cancel culture too far. Apple is successful because of their great products and services. Not their social/political opinions.
Apple tries to protect their customers.
Thank you, Tim Cook.
Being a stockholder, I would hope Apple protects “all”customers. Even the ones that don’t agree with their social/political stance.
I’m a long time Apple user and stockholder. I think they are taking censorship and cancel culture too far. Apple is successful because of their great products and services. Not their social/political opinions.
Sad to read you defend racism and white supremacy.
Being a Black man, I in no way defend racism or white supremacy. Your assumption shows your ignorance.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The corollary to the above First Amendment is this:
Individuals and corporations MAY make rules respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
If you Americans don't like the fact that companies like Facebook and Apple are abridging your freedom of speech, as permitted under the US Constitution, consider making a new amendment to your constitution. I think the next amendment number would be XXVIII. Here, let me draft it for you:
Amendment XXVIII: No corporation or legal agreement between two parties shall restrict any customer's or employee's or anyone's freedom of speech, or punish any such speech.
This draft amendment probably has lots of loopholes, and negative side effects, but it's a good starting point for discussion purposes. I mean, there goes trade secrets down the drain, for example.
Perhaps it's worth remembering that the right to say what you want does not include the right to force other people to propagate what you say.
I believe it was George Carlin who said it best years ago when talking about TV and radio: If you don't like what's on, turn the dial. If you don't like what's on social media, don't read it. No one forces you to read anything. Are you done reading my post, yet?
But shouldn't there be different rules for public airwaves vs private signals like cable? Children can easily get a hold of information on the public airwaves, but it's very hard for children to purchase private cable because that costs money and usually requires a credit card. You don't think children need to be protected? I doubt George Carlin was talking about public airwaves, probably just private ones.
I’m a long time Apple user and stockholder. I think they are taking censorship and cancel culture too far. Apple is successful because of their great products and services. Not their social/political opinions.
Sad to read you defend racism and white supremacy.
Being a Black man, I in no way defend racism or white supremacy. Your assumption shows your ignorance.
You didn't have to defend yourself. It was obvious his post was childish. You didn't call for an end to all censorship, but he failed to see that.
You have got to be kidding. Apple, seriously, putting out this statement and yet they allow facebook, twitter, reddit and just take a look at the top hip hop songs on Apple Music. Disgusting. Apple is spitting in your face and telling you it's raining.
Another poster who has no idea what he is talking about. Parler has such guidance and does have moderation. They don’t allow illegal activity, threats, etc. The difference is they don’t ban people who make comments that leftists twist into “Nazi propaganda.”
Here's Parler's community guidelines. It's a pretty short read. They might not allow direct threats but they do allow neo-Nazis on their platform. And I do mean literal, self-identifying neo-Nazis here, not just Fox News-style right-wing reactionaries. People with Nazi symbols in their bio.
Facebook and Twitter's community standards are much longer and call out the kind of rhetoric used by neo-Nazis. I think we can all agree that the big social media organizations could do more to apply the rules more consistently though.
Good, but heaven knows why it was allowed in the first place. Absolute cesspool.
So what if individuals write such horrible things
So what if someone is offended
You dont have a right to not be offended
This is so facist
George Orwell was right - his timing was just a bit off
If you dont have complete free speech then you have tyranny - the moronic youth of today havent a clue
Isnt it better to know who the dickheads are?
Surely the free exchange of ideas is more important than some random persons feelings
Nope. You don't understand what tyranny is. A clue: it's not when a private company refuses to do business with another private company because it won't fulfill its end of a contract.
Now Neo-Nazi, White Supremacist, and anarchists and other far right hate groups are hiding behind "Free Speech" to propagate their agenda.
Aside from the fact that no civilization, including the U.S. has ever had completely free speech, the American public is condemning those groups who are trying to use it in order to spread their propaganda.
The U.S. got burned once when a foreign enemy weaponized our free speech to sway an election. Now we have domestic terrorists trying to do the same in order to promote insurrection -- using the same tactics to radicalize their followers as ISIS used to radicalize theirs. Perhaps China has the right idea and we should establish education camps to deprogram these fools. But, for all of its faults, the 1950's & 60's also gave us examples of how anarchists and insurrectionists could/should be dealt with in a free society.
This nation has been headed down the same path that Germany pioneered in the 1930's. The question is: If we don't want to go there, what will we do to stop it from happening? What measures are we willing to take? (Obviously ignoring it and tolerating it has not worked well so far)
Sadly, Churchill may have had it right when he said: "Americans always do the right thing -- after they try everything else."
OK let's get a few things straight here For those who are calling out Apple for hypocrisy. Get over it. It's their store and they can reject your app if they don't like the length of your hair. Don't like it FU. For those that are playing the 'whattabout' card. Get over it. It's their store and they can play favourites if they want. Don't like it, FU. I am always amazed how many people hold up private property as an absolute right until they see the no trespassing sign. Then they want some higher standard used to force the issue. But don't dare try to use the same rational on something they own or like. THAT is hypocrisy. It's Apple's store. If you don't like how they run it, get an Android and use their store. If enough people agree Apple will change. But if they don't, that's tough there isn't a thing you can do about it. Do I like everything about how Apple runs their store? No, they do some things that really p*ss me off. But it's not my store so there isn't a bloody thing I can do about it. That's the way it is. I don't lose sleep over it, I don't get angry about it. I suggest you do the same.
I’m a long time Apple user and stockholder. I think they are taking censorship and cancel culture too far. Apple is successful because of their great products and services. Not their social/political opinions.
Sad to read you defend racism and white supremacy.
That was stated as if Parlor supposedly has the market cornered on that... and that racism can only be perpetuated by one ethic group. Parler disagrees with hateful speech. The only difference is just that they are not hypocritical in the enforcement of their rules. Facebook Twitter allows hateful speech and "hate speech" as long as it is targeted at the left's rivals. The problem is not that one is racist and the other is not... it's just that one side is hypocritical and inconsistent and the other isn't.
<censored>
Now let’s see if this gets censored and if you agree with it.
See what I did there? That is entirely uncalled for and is the kind of thing that derails a discussion and gets it deleted. Don't be a tool.
I’ll speak my mind. What I initially said in my first post is 100% correct. Parler discussions bring out the closet racists. But they can’t defend their racism so they disguise it as being concerned about “free speech” or “censorship”.
It’s all bullshit. You know why? Because they never argue about free speech or The Constitution when someone else is the target (for example, gays, transgenders, BLM or similar). Why is it when the neo-Nazis, racists or white supremacists are the target that people are suddenly bent out of shape?
The answer is obvious. You can tell a lot about someone by when they speak up and when they’re silent.
I’m a long time Apple user and stockholder. I think they are taking censorship and cancel culture too far. Apple is successful because of their great products and services. Not their social/political opinions.
Sad to read you defend racism and white supremacy.
That was stated as if Parlor supposedly has the market cornered on that... and that racism can only be perpetuated by one ethic group. Parler disagrees with hateful speech. The only difference is just that they are not hypocritical in the enforcement of their rules. Facebook Twitter allows hateful speech and "hate speech" as long as it is targeted at the left's rivals. The problem is not that one is racist and the other is not... it's just that one side is hypocritical and inconsistent and the other isn't.
<censored>
Now let’s see if this gets censored and if you agree with it.
See what I did there? That is entirely uncalled for and is the kind of thing that derails a discussion and gets it deleted. Don't be a tool.
I’ll speak my mind. What I initially said in my first post is 100% correct. Parler discussions bring out the closet racists. But they can’t defend their racism so they disguise it as being concerned about “free speech” or “censorship”.
Agree, and will add in to the mix the constant whining about "debate", as if the absolute word vomit they so often churn out is in any way resemblant of debate. Shouting slogans and platitudes in the pursuit of soundbites and gotchas in order to "win the internet" and "own the libs" is not debate.
The people making these arguments are not doing so in good faith, they are saboteurs, and denying them an amplification platform for their nonsense is a social responsibility.
Perhaps it's worth remembering that the right to say what you want does not include the right to force other people to propagate what you say.
I believe it was George Carlin who said it best years ago when talking about TV and radio: If you don't like what's on, turn the dial. If you don't like what's on social media, don't read it. No one forces you to read anything. Are you done reading my post, yet?
But that's not good enough. In the age of misinformation then mass media with the potential to reach millions is very powerful, and misuse of that very dangerous.
Jonathan Swift said something better even more years ago: Falsehood flies, and the Truth comes limping after it
Comments
If you Americans don't like the fact that companies like Facebook and Apple are abridging your freedom of speech, as permitted under the US Constitution, consider making a new amendment to your constitution. I think the next amendment number would be XXVIII. Here, let me draft it for you:
This draft amendment probably has lots of loopholes, and negative side effects, but it's a good starting point for discussion purposes. I mean, there goes trade secrets down the drain, for example.
Isnt it better to know who the dickheads are?
Surely the free exchange of ideas is more important than some random persons feelings
Facebook and Twitter's community standards are much longer and call out the kind of rhetoric used by neo-Nazis. I think we can all agree that the big social media organizations could do more to apply the rules more consistently though.
For those who are calling out Apple for hypocrisy. Get over it. It's their store and they can reject your app if they don't like the length of your hair. Don't like it FU.
For those that are playing the 'whattabout' card. Get over it. It's their store and they can play favourites if they want. Don't like it, FU.
I am always amazed how many people hold up private property as an absolute right until they see the no trespassing sign. Then they want some higher standard used to force the issue. But don't dare try to use the same rational on something they own or like. THAT is hypocrisy.
It's Apple's store. If you don't like how they run it, get an Android and use their store. If enough people agree Apple will change. But if they don't, that's tough there isn't a thing you can do about it. Do I like everything about how Apple runs their store? No, they do some things that really p*ss me off. But it's not my store so there isn't a bloody thing I can do about it. That's the way it is.
I don't lose sleep over it, I don't get angry about it. I suggest you do the same.
It’s all bullshit. You know why? Because they never argue about free speech or The Constitution when someone else is the target (for example, gays, transgenders, BLM or similar). Why is it when the neo-Nazis, racists or white supremacists are the target that people are suddenly bent out of shape?
The answer is obvious. You can tell a lot about someone by when they speak up and when they’re silent.
The people making these arguments are not doing so in good faith, they are saboteurs, and denying them an amplification platform for their nonsense is a social responsibility.
Jonathan Swift said something better even more years ago: Falsehood flies, and the Truth comes limping after it