I guess various social media platforms have banned Alex Jones?

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT
 

And I imagine some people will want to talk about it.

Good riddance, I suppose, although I shudder to think where the censors will go next. Judging by Twitter, I estimate that everything to the left of Reagan will lack any social media presence by 2021.

Note: the following is a joke, not his actual reaction.

Yeah, I can't say I feel bad for that Sandy Hook Truther/"Crisis Actor" POS getting what's coming to him in this regard.

And not to worry, he's still got right wing talk radio, Fox News and Breitbart where he can consider spewing his inane, shitty drivel. He's just not entitled to have it everywhere he wants it.

It's those corporations prerogative to hire and dump whoever they see fit because it's their platform. I'd love to tighter regulations on what corporations can and can't do but apparently something something socialism something something big brother something something Murica.

For the people who follow him, it's just going to make him look more like a martyr in their eyes.

Then again, I don't think theres anything in the world that would change someone who believes in Alex Jones. Best thing you can do is shove it away let them forget with time.

Good. Fuck him. Asshole got survivors of school shootings harassed. Being banned is a slap on the wrist frankly.

Smh, now how else are people going to learn the truth about the gay frogs and the chemicals?

If he was just an ordinary paranoid bigot on the internet that would be one thing, but keep in mind that the main source of income for Infowars is selling fake medicine. And I have no fucking patience for that, medical quacks kill people and they belong in jail.

This isn't nearly the extent of what he and his operation deserve but it's a step in the right direction.

Dalisclock:
Yeah, I can't say I feel bad for that Sandy Hook Truther/"Crisis Actor" POS getting what's coming to him in this regard.

And not to worry, he's still got right wing talk radio, Fox News and Breitbart where he can consider spewing his inane, shitty drivel. He's just not entitled to have it everywhere he wants it.

It's those corporations prerogative to hire and dump whoever they see fit because it's their platform. I'd love to tighter regulations on what corporations can and can't do but apparently something something socialism something something big brother something something Murica.

Yeah, even Fox and Breitbart aren't as crazy as Jones. I wonder if he's going to complain about their censorship too.

renegade7:
If he was just an ordinary paranoid bigot on the internet that would be one thing, but keep in mind that the main source of income for Infowars is selling fake medicine. And I have no fucking patience for that, medical quacks kill people and they belong in jail.

This isn't nearly the extent of what he and his operation deserve but it's a step in the right direction.

isn't this just Natural Selection? I don't know why Jones wants to kill his own audience

Edit: How did this not happen before?

renegade7:
If he was just an ordinary paranoid bigot on the internet that would be one thing, but keep in mind that the main source of income for Infowars is selling fake medicine. And I have no fucking patience for that, medical quacks kill people and they belong in jail.

This isn't nearly the extent of what he and his operation deserve but it's a step in the right direction.

His reaction to was basically "I totally saw this coming, make sure to buy more supplement to make up for my lost revenue".

What actually pushed them over the edge? I mean claiming that sandy hook never happened wasn't enough, what did he do lately?

Anyway, another one will just replace him soon enough, there's a clear demand for crazy people to spout reassuring non sense.

At least we'll still have the memes to laugh at him.

Meiam:
What actually pushed them over the edge? I mean claiming that sandy hook never happened wasn't enough, what did he do lately?

I believe he said that drag queens should be "burned alive", which understandably was taken as a call for action.

I could be wrong though, I haven't really been following this drama closely. It could be some other awful thing he said.

Ah, the terrifying reality of modern society: a trillion-dollar IT company can do more to rein in bullshit pseudo-news overnight than the government can do in years.

It's good news, of course, but it also lays bare the underpinning rationale behind Facebook and Youtube's initial reluctance to moderate extreme speech on their respective platforms. Beforehand, these websites justified allowing Alex Jones to spew high-pressure feces over an internet connection on the basis of his right to freedom of speech, even blatantly false and misleading speech.

Then Apple jumps in the deep end and bans him, and suddenly keeping Alex Jones on your platform becomes the politically inconvenient thing to do, so now everybody can't wait to get rid of him. Which makes it really obvious that the only thing holding any of these companies back from actually moderating their community is the fear of a PR backlash. (Incidentally...)

Normally I'd say I was concerned for free speech and all that, but the plain fact of it is that I don't give two hoots about Alex Jones, and I hope he's diagnosed with ass cancer. The man just recently sued the family of one of the Sandy Hook victims for $100,000 in court costs. I have to unpack that so you can fully appreciate how heinous it is: this guy accuses a family that just lost a six-year-old child of first inventing that child and then staging his fake death as part of a government gun control conspiracy, and when they sued him for defamation, he has the fucking gall to demand they pay his legal fees. No; Alex Jones can go roast on a fucking spit.

INB4 Zontar links a vid of Razorfist bitching against Youtube for this:

As to what I personally think? Alex fuckin Jones?! Why couldn't they shut down Stefan Molyneux first? That guy imo is more dangerous than Alex Jones.

bastardofmelbourne:
Ah, the terrifying reality of modern society: a trillion-dollar IT company can do more to rein in bullshit pseudo-news overnight than the government can do in years.

It's good news, of course, but it also lays bare the underpinning rationale behind Facebook and Youtube's initial reluctance to moderate extreme speech on their respective platforms. Beforehand, these websites justified allowing Alex Jones to spew high-pressure feces over an internet connection on the basis of his right to freedom of speech, even blatantly false and misleading speech.

Then Apple jumps in the deep end and bans him, and suddenly keeping Alex Jones on your platform becomes the politically inconvenient thing to do, so now everybody can't wait to get rid of him. Which makes it really obvious that the only thing holding any of these companies back from actually moderating their community is the fear of a PR backlash. (Incidentally...)

Normally I'd say I was concerned for free speech and all that, but the plain fact of it is that I don't give two hoots about Alex Jones, and I hope he's diagnosed with ass cancer. The man just recently sued the family of one of the Sandy Hook victims for $100,000 in court costs. I have to unpack that so you can fully appreciate how heinous it is: this guy accuses a family that just lost a six-year-old child of first inventing that child and then staging his fake death as part of a government gun control conspiracy, and when they sued him for defamation, he has the fucking gall to demand they pay his legal fees. No; Alex Jones can go roast on a fucking spit.

I believe the right of businesses to do whatever the fuck they want is a right-wing view. No right-winger has any excuse to get mad at this. Not saying a ton wont, nor would it be a surprise cause the right is powered by hypocrisy, but still.

trunkage:
isn't this just Natural Selection? I don't know why Jones wants to kill his own audience

The funniest part for me is one of infowars 'journalists' is pushing the idea that eating soy feminises men, and is leading to a generation of weak and infertile men (the so called 'soy boys').

The active ingredient in the supplements InfoWars is hawking?

Soy.

Nuuu:
For the people who follow him, it's just going to make him look more like a martyr in their eyes.

Then again, I don't think theres anything in the world that would change someone who believes in Alex Jones. Best thing you can do is shove it away let them forget with time.

I don't think this matters as much as people say. Honestly, let them be martyrs to people who already worship them anyways and leave the rest of us alone.

bastardofmelbourne:
Then Apple jumps in the deep end and bans him, and suddenly keeping Alex Jones on your platform becomes the politically inconvenient thing to do, so now everybody can't wait to get rid of him. Which makes it really obvious that the only thing holding any of these companies back from actually moderating their community is the fear of a PR backlash. (Incidentally...)

There's a concept in economics called the "kinked demand curve", related to oligopolies. It describes how markets respond to an oligopoly changing its price; if a company in conditions of oligopoly lowers its price, others will follow suit and they'll all make less money. If it raises its price, it will lose its share of the market and make less money. So the market encourages companies in such positions either not to change prices at all or to coordinate to raise them all at the same time.

Similar logic governs what is occurring here, although it's not directly related to price: Apple changes their product-- makes it distinct-- by disassociating it with Jones w/o changing the price, competitors (for attention) feel pressure to follow suit in order to stay competitive. It's difficult for these companies to calculate whether they'll gain or lose money over having a different policy with respect to Jones, but what they can be sure of is that Alex Jones is ultimately a small fish compared to their whole traffic, so they follow suit: one of them changing for absolutely defensible reasons shifted the whole market's equilibrium position with regard to Jones. Oligopoly favors being the same as your competitors in such controversial respects (price, politics, deplatforming policy, etc.). Conformity is rewarded.

This is both why they all did it at once and, most likely, also why it took them so long to do it in the first place.

Seanchaidh:

bastardofmelbourne:
Then Apple jumps in the deep end and bans him, and suddenly keeping Alex Jones on your platform becomes the politically inconvenient thing to do, so now everybody can't wait to get rid of him. Which makes it really obvious that the only thing holding any of these companies back from actually moderating their community is the fear of a PR backlash. (Incidentally...)

There's a concept in economics called the "kinked demand curve", related to oligopolies. It describes how markets respond to an oligopoly changing its price; if a company in conditions of oligopoly lowers its price, others will follow suit and they'll all make less money. If it raises its price, it will lose its share of the market and make less money. So the market encourages companies in such positions either not to change prices at all or to coordinate to raise them all at the same time.

Similar logic governs what is occurring here, although it's not directly related to price: Apple changes their product-- makes it distinct-- by disassociating it with Jones w/o changing the price, competitors (for attention) feel pressure to follow suit in order to stay competitive. It's difficult for these companies to calculate whether they'll gain or lose money over having a different policy with respect to Jones, but what they can be sure of is that Alex Jones is ultimately a small fish compared to their whole traffic, so they follow suit: one of them changing for absolutely defensible reasons shifted the whole market's equilibrium position with regard to Jones. Oligopoly favors being the same as your competitors in such controversial respects (price, politics, deplatforming policy, etc.). Conformity is rewarded.

This is both why they all did it at once and, most likely, also why it took them so long to do it in the first place.

I learned something new today!

Seanchaidh:
And I imagine some people will want to talk about it.

The interesting part is that Apple, YouTube, Spotify, Facebook, Pinterest and even apparently YouPorn all banned him in less than a day. This has the unfortunate side effect (especially given who his fanbase is) of making it look like a coordinated effort.

CM156:
Smh, now how else are people going to learn the truth about the gay frogs and the chemicals?

The sad part is he's not entirely wrong about that, just not explaining it well. There are chemicals which enter the water supply and which amphibians are very sensitive to and that can have that effect (or simply turn them female). There's just not an intent or plan to it, and the government is only involved insofar as they approved those chemicals for use in the first place.

Windknight:
The funniest part for me is one of infowars 'journalists' is pushing the idea that eating soy feminises men, and is leading to a generation of weak and infertile men (the so called 'soy boys').

The active ingredient in the supplements InfoWars is hawking?

Soy.

OK, that is hilarious. Please tell me the same guy does both.

Meiam:

renegade7:
If he was just an ordinary paranoid bigot on the internet that would be one thing, but keep in mind that the main source of income for Infowars is selling fake medicine. And I have no fucking patience for that, medical quacks kill people and they belong in jail.

This isn't nearly the extent of what he and his operation deserve but it's a step in the right direction.

His reaction to was basically "I totally saw this coming, make sure to buy more supplement to make up for my lost revenue".

What actually pushed them over the edge? I mean claiming that sandy hook never happened wasn't enough, what did he do lately?

I think what happened is that Facebook got in trouble last week when Mark Zuckerberg said that he thought that Holocaust deniers should be allowed on the platform and the hit to their stock prices and threat of regulatory intervention finally made them realize that they needed to do something about people like Alex Jones. Then once one platform had banned him, other platforms, who had been trying to get rid of him for a long time but worried it would cause a backlash, felt more secure in doing the same.

Anyway, another one will just replace him soon enough, there's a clear demand for crazy people to spout reassuring non sense.

YouTube is already a nest of conspiratorial racism with or without the presence of Alex Jones, and I'm fairly certain that those who have been getting their fix from Infowars will just migrate over to the likes of Lauren Southern and Black Pigeon Speaks, which really says a great about deal about both the followers of Alex Jones and the followers of the various rightist YouTube channels.

Schadrach:

Windknight:
The funniest part for me is one of infowars 'journalists' is pushing the idea that eating soy feminises men, and is leading to a generation of weak and infertile men (the so called 'soy boys').

The active ingredient in the supplements InfoWars is hawking?

Soy.

OK, that is hilarious. Please tell me the same guy does both.

Behold our lord and master Harris Bomberguy:

More in-depth debunking of the soyboy nonsense:

Coda: Paul Joseph Watson does not take the criticism well, throws on a wig, yells at camera, and subsequently gets owned.

Seanchaidh:

bastardofmelbourne:
Then Apple jumps in the deep end and bans him, and suddenly keeping Alex Jones on your platform becomes the politically inconvenient thing to do, so now everybody can't wait to get rid of him. Which makes it really obvious that the only thing holding any of these companies back from actually moderating their community is the fear of a PR backlash. (Incidentally...)

There's a concept in economics called the "kinked demand curve", related to oligopolies. It describes how markets respond to an oligopoly changing its price; if a company in conditions of oligopoly lowers its price, others will follow suit and they'll all make less money. If it raises its price, it will lose its share of the market and make less money. So the market encourages companies in such positions either not to change prices at all or to coordinate to raise them all at the same time.

Similar logic governs what is occurring here, although it's not directly related to price: Apple changes their product-- makes it distinct-- by disassociating it with Jones w/o changing the price, competitors (for attention) feel pressure to follow suit in order to stay competitive. It's difficult for these companies to calculate whether they'll gain or lose money over having a different policy with respect to Jones, but what they can be sure of is that Alex Jones is ultimately a small fish compared to their whole traffic, so they follow suit: one of them changing for absolutely defensible reasons shifted the whole market's equilibrium position with regard to Jones. Oligopoly favors being the same as your competitors in such controversial respects (price, politics, deplatforming policy, etc.). Conformity is rewarded.

This is both why they all did it at once and, most likely, also why it took them so long to do it in the first place.

I certainly have seen the oligopoly in game store and gaming section in tech stores over here. You can't chase down for a store selling a specific game at a lower price, because every chain has it at the same price (maybe some cents more or some cents less). They know the public would rather buy cheaper games (that's why game stores sell used games at lower prices).

That would mean they believe the pubic would rather have their products be Alex-Jones-free. That's... kinda funny.

This is long overdue, and hopefully anyone who does decide to host him will be sued for damages from those who have been terribly affected by his BS peddling. The families, friends, and survivors of Sandy Hook, Parkland and other tragedies who have been gravely harmed by Jones's actions should sue anyone who hosts him for what they have been put through due to his actions. Parents who lost a child, Children who lost their brother or sister or best friends should not be receiving death threats, having people stalk, harass, and follow them wherever they go, have to remove all their online information and pay for body guards due to some jerk wanting to make up nonsense about them.

Honestly Alex really should be in Jail, not making money off of paranoid and gullible people. What he has done has endangered peoples lives and caused great harm and suffering to people already enduring horrific tragedy and loss. He should be held criminally responsible as well as civil, as what he does really should be considered illegal. It isn't like this is a victimless crime here, people have been harmed already from his actions. He has always been a F'd up person, but he isn't just harming himself here, he is harming others.

Schadrach:

Seanchaidh:
And I imagine some people will want to talk about it.

The interesting part is that Apple, YouTube, Spotify, Facebook, Pinterest and even apparently YouPorn all banned him in less than a day. This has the unfortunate side effect (especially given who his fanbase is) of making it look like a coordinated effort.

And they should coordinate to help ensure that the message gets across. Reminds me of when I was bartending in college, when we had someone who was repeatedly causing serious trouble, or who committed a very serious offense, we had a system with most the pubs in the area that we sent a name an photo of them to the other pubs and they would be banned from all the pubs, not just one. Casinos do the same thing. This is a common practice among local businesses, it is good it is finally being used online. I would like to see more of this type of coordination tbh, as it helps reduce the damages and problems created by Toxic people.

Saelune:

Nuuu:
For the people who follow him, it's just going to make him look more like a martyr in their eyes.

Then again, I don't think theres anything in the world that would change someone who believes in Alex Jones. Best thing you can do is shove it away let them forget with time.

I don't think this matters as much as people say. Honestly, let them be martyrs to people who already worship them anyways and leave the rest of us alone.

This does run the risk of making him more attractive and appealing to some people, but you can't save the people that actually believe what Jones is selling. They're lost, and no amount of platform bans is going to awaken these people.

This is ultimately what the problem is -- it's not what Jones is saying. There are plenty of people peddling bullshit on the web. It's that a lot of people *believe* Jones. He has a sizeable audience that has acted out on his conspiracies and lies. And I'm not sure banning him on YouTube and iTunes is going to change that. So I'm not sure what the answer is. Google and Apple can't go back in time and cut him off BEFORE he accrued such a large audience and had people harassing the parents of murdered children, and I'm not sure if we could reasonable determine where the Rubicon was for that. I'm not sure what the solution is for this one, but I'm not confident the bans will ultimately have the long term desired effect that most people are hoping for.

And for the record, lest anyway thinks I'm defending him: Jones is despicable and if there's any justice in this world, he'll be sued into bankruptcy by the Sandy Hook parents.

Samtemdo8:
INB4 Zontar links a vid of Razorfist bitching against Youtube for this:

As to what I personally think? Alex fuckin Jones?! Why couldn't they shut down Stefan Molyneux first? That guy imo is more dangerous than Alex Jones.

Why would anyone, Zontar included, care what Razorfist thinks? The dude is little better than a QAnon follower with a thesaurus and a massive hate boner for his own life.

Exley97:

Saelune:

Nuuu:
For the people who follow him, it's just going to make him look more like a martyr in their eyes.

Then again, I don't think theres anything in the world that would change someone who believes in Alex Jones. Best thing you can do is shove it away let them forget with time.

I don't think this matters as much as people say. Honestly, let them be martyrs to people who already worship them anyways and leave the rest of us alone.

This does run the risk of making him more attractive and appealing to some people, but you can't save the people that actually believe what Jones is selling. They're lost, and no amount of platform bans is going to awaken these people.

This is ultimately what the problem is -- it's not what Jones is saying. There are plenty of people peddling bullshit on the web. It's that a lot of people *believe* Jones. He has a sizeable audience that has acted out on his conspiracies and lies. And I'm not sure banning him on YouTube and iTunes is going to change that. So I'm not sure what the answer is. Google and Apple can't go back in time and cut him off BEFORE he accrued such a large audience and had people harassing the parents of murdered children, and I'm not sure if we could reasonable determine where the Rubicon was for that. I'm not sure what the solution is for this one, but I'm not confident the bans will ultimately have the long term desired effect that most people are hoping for.

And for the record, lest anyway thinks I'm defending him: Jones is despicable and if there's any justice in this world, he'll be sued into bankruptcy by the Sandy Hook parents.

A person who relies on people hearing them to prosper being limited on who can hear them will only be hurt by it. Martyrs dont matter, I dont think they ever really mattered as much as people say.

Saelune:
A person who relies on people hearing them to prosper being limited on who can hear them will only be hurt by it. Martyrs dont matter, I dont think they ever really mattered as much as people say.

It's not about hurting Jones, or even making him a martyr. I'm saying the people who follow Jones and believe what he's saying are *broken* and no amount of banning is going to fix them. Will banning him prevent other broken people from following him? Maybe, maybe not. I'm skeptical that someone who believe the Sandy Hook truther nonsense and has invested so much energy and belief in this lie will be deterred much. If they want the content, they can find it on other channels or directly through Infowars.

So yes, if private companies like FB and Google want to drop him for objectionable content or actions, fine. They're under no obligation to give him a platform. I'm merely saying that as a preventative measure designed to limit Jones' influence, I'm not sure how successful it will be in the long run.

Exley97:

Saelune:
A person who relies on people hearing them to prosper being limited on who can hear them will only be hurt by it. Martyrs dont matter, I dont think they ever really mattered as much as people say.

It's not about hurting Jones, or even making him a martyr. I'm saying the people who follow Jones and believe what he's saying are *broken* and no amount of banning is going to fix them. Will banning him prevent other broken people from following him? Maybe, maybe not. I'm skeptical that someone who believe the Sandy Hook truther nonsense and has invested so much energy and belief in this lie will be deterred much. If they want the content, they can find it on other channels or directly through Infowars.

So yes, if private companies like FB and Google want to drop him for objectionable content or actions, fine. They're under no obligation to give him a platform. I'm merely saying that as a preventative measure designed to limit Jones' influence, I'm not sure how successful it will be in the long run.

Oh, well, still, it means less of us have to deal with Jones and that is fine by me.

Eh I dunno guys, it smells fishy to me. I reckon this 'Alex Jones' guy is actually just a crisis actor. He was never banned, it was an elaborate hoax, with actors, constructed by the deep state to rile up people on the right and make them support homosexual frogs.

Vrex360:
Eh I dunno guys, it smells fishy to me. I reckon this 'Alex Jones' guy is actually just a crisis actor. He was never banned, it was an elaborate hoax, with actors, constructed by the deep state to rile up people on the right and make them support homosexual frogs.

You forgot about the fake medical remedies that make him heaps of money. I was going to make a joke about being controlled by Big Pharma but I don't know who it would actually be

trunkage:

Vrex360:
Eh I dunno guys, it smells fishy to me. I reckon this 'Alex Jones' guy is actually just a crisis actor. He was never banned, it was an elaborate hoax, with actors, constructed by the deep state to rile up people on the right and make them support homosexual frogs.

You forgot about the fake medical remedies that make him heaps of money. I was going to make a joke about being controlled by Big Pharma but I don't know who it would actually be

Big (snake) Oil.

Seanchaidh:

trunkage:

Vrex360:
Eh I dunno guys, it smells fishy to me. I reckon this 'Alex Jones' guy is actually just a crisis actor. He was never banned, it was an elaborate hoax, with actors, constructed by the deep state to rile up people on the right and make them support homosexual frogs.

You forgot about the fake medical remedies that make him heaps of money. I was going to make a joke about being controlled by Big Pharma but I don't know who it would actually be

Big (snake) Oil.

That sounds like a Metal Gear codename.

Oh wow, big tech getting together to synchronise a ban on someone they don't like. Definitely a good precedent to set!

Disgusting.

Whitbane:
Oh wow, big tech getting together to synchronise a ban on someone they don't like. Definitely a good precedent to set!

Disgusting.

The ban itself is justified; there are a lot better cases to hang your hat on when it comes to facebook censorship. It's not like this is the first person they've ever banned. Other bans just don't get punted all over the media. Alex Jones literally could face civil penalties for some of the speech he's been putting out there. In a speech-friendly jurisdiction like the United States! A ban from facebook et al., if anything, is late.

renegade7:

Behold our lord and master Harris Bomberguy:

Entertaining, thanks.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here