Get the App

Newsvoice isn't just another news site. It's crowdsourced and democratized. We move the power over the news to you. Join the movement by downloading the app.
LEARN MORE GET THE APP
Comments

Beck70 1 weeks
I approve of this, though I don't know if anything will come of this.
........ 1 weeks
The backlash from the left for the whole world to see is a great result.
Rick Snow 1 weeks
The whinging from the right will be entertaining.
Daniel McEwen 1 weeks
Also approve. Sort of minor with me but YT has prevented me from commenting on posts. I've never posted any videos. If I switch to another account I can post just fine. It's them. I even had a guy on chat from YT who couldn't figure it out but also didn't see the block.

Avi Khait 1 weeks
There should be some checks and balances. I don't trust either govt, activist judges, NGOs or corporations, but maybe some combination of those could work.
Chris Cahill 1 weeks
Just apply the 1st amendment in law and principal to the internet. Fuck apply as much as the bill of rights to the web as possible. There I fixed it.
Randy Souse-Git 1 weeks
Remember when common sense applied to the internet? * Don't feed the trolls * If you don't like what someone says, block or ignore them * People get removed for illegal acts /threats /incitement / harassment (harassment is a pattern not a one off) * Rules were clearly spelled out without vagaries and slippery slopes * Moderation applied corrections in tiered layers of increasing severity to allow people a chance to reform... Unless the activity was illegal and then the ban hammer was swung hard and authorities were notified As someone who was and is a Moderator across multiple forums, I can tell you this is how it should be. Self regulation CAN work if the Moderator Team does its job properly and the users do their part to self regulate by blocking and ignoring those they don't want to interact with. That's how a platform works. Social media claims to be a platform while refusing to govern itself as one. The time is past for social media to be able to claim they are platforms. The regulations are already in place. Simply ignore that they claim to be platforms and force them to be treated as the publishers they obviously are. Remove their unearned protection from libel laws as a platform and they will quickly bleed out of cash from all the tortuous activity they regularly engage in.
paddy 1 weeks
the precedent has already been set, in the eyes of the supreme Court social media sites are public spaces subject to the first amendment. the social media giants are doing everything they can to subvert this, it's only a matter of time before their actions are ruled unconstitutional. that is part of the purpose of the system set up by the white house.

Brandon Spears 1 weeks
Interesting, I'd like to see how this plays out because if it sounds like what I think is happening then it means Donald Trump is collecting evidence that Social media platforms are censoring the right and if it goes as planned he could destroy all the platforms with massive evidence that can't be ignored. Hopefully however it doesn't backfire though with majority of people taken down just so happening to be dog whistling so hard for white supremacy that aliens in outer space can hear that crap from galaxies away...
Beisht Kione 1 weeks
How was Paul Joseph Watson dog whistling?
Randy Souse-Git 1 weeks
Dog whistling is made up bull snot. The term is nothing more than a smear tactic. Once you get the rubes to accept the term, ANYTHING can be claimed to be a dog whistle. "OMG! Martha used flour to bake that bread. Flour is white. Martha is dog whistling to the white supremacists." wake up and smell the coffee. Oh snap. Did I just 'dog whistle' to the Columbians?
Mitchell 1 weeks
Dog whistles. Supposedly only the white supremacists can hear them. Isn't it curious how the wolf crying left has the ability to hear them?