>Members of Congress in both parties have begun exploring possible legislative action against Facebook and other tech giants, setting the stage for a potentially massive battle in the midterm election year of 2018.
>The shift against the companies has been sudden, and is one of the biggest stories of the year.
>Republicans are likely to emphasize the national security and homeland security aspects to reining in the tech companies.
>A GOP lobbyist who's involved in the conversations says that the populist right in Trump's base views tech companies as political combatants that favor open border and liberal social policies.
Good, they have become so big and powerful they should either be broken up or labled as utilities.
Lincoln Watson
No they shouldn't, people should be using social media less. Even more so if they disagree with the way the companies direction is going. There also exists a number of competitors to Facebook and YouTube that it doesn't justify anti-monopoly actions either.
Levi Hill
(((Google and Facebook)))
Michael Martin
best news I've heard all day
Zachary Hughes
This is the result of technology advancing further then our legislators. Who may still be having trouble knowing how to work email without younger aid support. It also sets the stage for someone like Zuckerberg to come in acting persecuted and try an win the youth vote. By lambasting the 'out of touch' representatives
Julian Price
True if big
Eli Adams
>Republicans are likely to emphasize the national security and homeland security aspects to reining in the tech companies. In other words - expect less privacy/anonymity in the digital world. The last place we have some shred of it
>Trump's base views tech companies as political combatants that favor open border and liberal social policies. This is true, but the correct solution is to go towards competitors or form new ones.
Connor Powell
Fuck off faggot.
These are monopolies and they are evil. You're shilling for the CIA right now.
Xavier Gonzalez
You're such a huge faggot its unbelievable.
MAYBE GOOGLE AND FACEBOOK SHOULDNT HAVE GONE FULL 1984
Xavier Torres
Fuck this shit, can't believe the drooling Natsoc retards here are for government intervention on the internet. Don't like Facebook or Google, don't use them you pricks.
Carson Gray
>These are monopolies Look up the definition of a monopoly. Because there is a number of other social media options (and large ones) this means they are not monopolies.
>Evil How do you figure?
>Shilling for the CIA >Wants more government intervention into business >Claims I'm shilling for government Might want to think your messages through more.
William Garcia
If he got in because muh faceberg we deserve a globalist dystopia
Jackson Johnson
You're working overtime aren't you?
Fuck you. You have no soul.
Landon Hughes
I hope to God every enabler inside Alphabet Inc. and Facebook.com gets indicted.
Camden Sullivan
Am I the only one that feels regardless of Government interference, Facebook will be irrelevant in ten years? Google, not so much.
Alexander Cruz
>Google and Facebook shouldn't of gone full 1984 They haven't, the companies are trying to appeal to what they perceive as the largest market share. You want to change their direction? Drop their company and go towards a competitor who shares your views. If you use their product even while whining about their political agenda. What motivation do they have to provide any leverage towards your demographic?
Also, in comparison to other western countries like Canada, UK, Germany. The USA is not very close to 1984. But pushing for more government involvement will change that.
Evan Foster
Doesn't matter. Justice needs to be done.
Matthew Powell
Why are you shilling so hard for Google and Facebook?
Luis Miller
I don't disagree, the majority of voters are incredibly stupid. Destroying local communities and plugging everyone in just means greater single sources have influence now too. I do disagree that we should accept our fate and let our future offspring suffer when we could of done something though.
Adam Lee
>You want to change their direction? Drop their company and go towards a competitor who shares your views Or we could just force them to comply with existing laws.
Anthony Martinez
Not an argument
>You have no soul Emotional appeal, try using your words to let me know why you think I'm wrong.
John Morris
>Gets indicted For what?
Jace Lee
Sedition.
Jacob Jones
>Look up the definition of a monopoly. Because there is a number of other social media options (and large ones) this means they are not monopolies.
>Biggest and only viable alternative >Actively suppress all competitors unwilling to sell >Buyout competitors that don't have the moral compass to resist >Use backroom deals and international regulating bodies to remove competition
Yeah sure as shit doesn't sound like a monopoly
>2 squares of toilet paper have been deposited to your street
Isaac James
>They haven't, the companies are trying to appeal to what they perceive as the largest market share Fuck that. They could have easily just stayed out of it and focused on their products/services
Elijah Turner
>They haven't
Caleb Brown
What people don't realize is that most of the Silicon valley tech giants are on the way out. People are getting bored, moving onto new things all the time. The lack of social interaction obsessing over the product has on families and communities. Will lead to natural decline of use as well.
Daniel Robinson
about time bot GOOGLE and FACEBOOK need to be shattered into 1000 pieces and scattered to the winds
Carson Parker
Like a decentralized service?
Ryan Reed
What oyu don't realize is your shilling isn't going to work. Google and Facebook are evil companies and will be broken up. Deal with it.
Oliver Brown
I'm saying the law doesn't apply here. That making them government assets will harm us. That wanting government to intervene because the companies don't hold political positions we like can backfire. I'm shilling for commentators to actually think this through instead of going full >FUCKING BASED
Chase Green
Just put excise taxes on these services, payable by the corporations themselves. Charge Faceberg $3.50 per new account that is opened on his network, and an additional $0.10 for every 100 social media posts that account makes. Tax google $0.03 per internet search it delivers. Stop waiting for these companies to report their income honestly and be subjected to income tax. Just hit them with excise taxes up front, and punitive ones if they have an anti-white or anti-American agenda. Nuke them.
Jonathan Robinson
What laws have they broken, user?
David Rogers
>us
US MEANING YOUR EMPLOYERS?
GOOD I WANT THEM TO BE HARMED
Christian Phillips
legit question: how many people would kill themselves if facebook was suddenly shut down?
Bentley Wilson
>Govrnment control of private entities is so based Fuck of faggots
Kayden Parker
GOVT WOULDNT CONTROL IT. Have you heard about when phone companies got broken up?
Ian Robinson
Not enough
Dominic Powell
>Sedition >Marketing towards 'rebel' consumers is direct company involvement in government insurrection No. If that where the case every company involved in the 60s-80s would be behind bars right now. There is no strong evidence or precedent to support that.
Landon Torres
MUH DIK
Sebastian Phillips
As usual, the ancap flag is asking the wrong question. How many less people would kill themselves if Facebook was suddenly shut down, is the relevant one.
William Fisher
They allow pedophile videos to be kept up but demonitize and remove conservative videos.
They added a new feature for videos that dont violate their terms of service to put them in a limited state.
GOOGLE IS NOW DEFENDING THE WEBSITE BACKPAGE FOR HAVING CHILD SEX TRAFFICKING ADS ON IT.
YOU ARE SICK
I HOPE YOU COMMIT SUICIDE.
Jace Diaz
There won't be government control. Facebook and Google will simply be responsible for all illegal content published on their platform.
I don't think anyone shills for totally unfettered capitalism
Wyatt Gomez
See
Nathaniel Wood
>Biggest and only viable alternative >Facebook, Twitter, and Google are all the same companies No.
>Actively suppresses all competitors unwilling to sell >We should solve this through more government involvement No
>Buyout competitors that don't have the moral compass to resist Start your own company and don't sell then. In addition to advocating for less government barriers on other people doing so. Not more
>Use backroom deals and international regulating bodies to remove competition "Backroom deals" are politics and business 101 user. Removing government barriers to allow for larger competition is the right path to go down however.
Carter Brooks
Not what we are talking about. This is about making companies public utlitites.
Adrian Sanders
>They could have easily stayed out of it and focused on their products services Marketing is just that, look at past decades how companies did the very same thing by trying to appeal to what they perceived as the largest market share.
Hunter Williams
Why are you defending these sick pedophile enabling companies so hard?
Are you a pedophile?
Nicholas Flores
The time for civilized politics is over. Modern politics requires absolute and brutal retaliation. Nothing less.
Nathan Miller
So your opinions are based on emotion? Do you not see the danger in being so arbitrary?
Xavier Robinson
smash em all
Jaxon Flores
THEY ARENT GOING TO MAKE THESE COMPANIES UTILITIES RETARD.
They're going to break them up and sell them to different people.
Youtube will be 1 thing
google.
etc.
Leo Thompson
>having that flag and being opposed to setting regulations on a corporations behavior You have to re read Mein Kampf you nigger. If a corporation seeks to harm the country it resides in it either changes or is no longer allowed to operate in the country.
Logan Lewis
>Evil Provide reasoning for why you think this. Making a claim you're unwilling to make a case for makes you look like a fool.
Jeremiah Clark
zero. Someone would come up with a new social network and normies would probably just continue being stupid after a couple of months of some social anxiety, nothing that the xanax can't help them with
David Robinson
What a moronic arguments. Hey cops fail to catch pedos, so why are you defending cops. Are you pedophile?
12 year olds or low IQ faggots need to stop posting
Adrian Foster
We need to get all the republicans and democrats out of office in the next 12 years or we are fucked
Jason Wilson
Nigger. Do you not understand that they are trying to shape the scope of discourse for people. They are using their services to manipulate the populace into thinking things. They censor certain discussions and allow other things.
They are manipulators. That is evil.
Charles Lee
>Tax the corporations more No. This is the kind of thing that leads to getting monopolies in the first place.
Matthew Hall
>Marketing is just that You can easily appeal to people on all sides with a service like that. Literally just show people how cool it is to use or what the fuck ever and both sides will use it for their own shit. They've turned a large chunk of potential loyal users against them with retarded virtue signaling
Grayson Lewis
Us meaning those of us on an anonymous Mongolian ice fishing board. Those of us who're likely here because we enjoy private and open discussion, mixed in with shit posting.
Ryan Cox
>Demonized conservative videos Why shouldn't they? It's a private company. If you opened a business, should you be required to put up with venders that sell drugs and dildos?
Jaxson Brown
Google and Facebook are currently public utilities. How do you think they get around regulation that would result in legal action for the content posted on their platforms?
They've just been lucky enough to operate in legal grey area where they aren't expected to to adhere to the same responsibilities as a telephone or mail company.
Hunter Diaz
So the state is going to decide who own and runs companies. Make this a precedent. See what dark road you guys run into if democrats ever come into power again.
Aaron Fisher
Because of the size of these companies and the market share they need to be beholden to the constituion.
Matthew Watson
You're all a bunch of fucking idiots.
Isn't it obvious?
"Donate to our campaigns or we'll regulate you."
Dylan Turner
>Curse these darn fangled cars, people should be using them less, they're just getting lazy
Ryan Robinson
This. I'm not opposed to a better functioning government nationalizing industry as a concept, perhaps in the future. But our current government has no business doing it. Government is already a fucking mess that needs to be sorted out.
Alexander Long
>At a White House dinner in 2015, Mr. Zuckerberg had even asked the Chinese president, Xi Jinping, whether Mr. Xi might offer a Chinese name for his soon-to-be-born first child — usually a privilege reserved for older relatives, or sometimes a fortune teller. Mr. Xi declined, according to a person briefed on the matter.
What a brown nosing, kowtowing, Jewish son of a bitch Zuckerberg is. Can you imagine what he will be like as president?
Nathaniel James
Listen. The fact there's shills for Google and Facebook on here makes me want this even more. It means those kikes are scared.
Austin Hill
>private Technically yea, let's face it, the us government outsourced freedom of speech to these guys to bypass the first amendment.
Nicholas Miller
if true than good. They blatantly mock the 1st and 4th amendments. bring them to heel
Eli Ward
Yes, because I want my internets to be the same quality as my roads or public schools. Stay faggoty, crypto-leftist.
Kayden Fisher
Can't say I like Congress fighting the free market, but the tech companies brought this on their own heads by stepping into politics and practicing censorship. Let them burn.
Luis Wood
I swear he's the reincarnation of a certain Emperor.
Gabriel Edwards
>I have no coherent ideology and i get triggered when someone else does.
Fuck you tards. You are basically authoritarian trying to give liberals a precedent to shut down private entites that don't agree with them.
Brayden Wright
Good. Kys faggot.
Ryan Cook
Why do you think they shill so hard for the lolberg meme of letting our currency be controlled by the private federal reserve. The trick to it is keeping the agents of internationalism out while doing what is best and responsible while still allowing free enterprise and profit to flourish. But a free for all ancap or too much regulation like communism are to be avoided.
Cameron Richardson
>They allow pedophile videos to be kept up They don't. On the threads which brought them to attention I reported them, followed up, and saw them removed within 12hrs. The only ones they tend to keep up are those which can be argued are not 'sexual in nature' which is a grey area in the modern era anyway.
>Demonetize and remove conservative videos Companies can set their own 'terms of use' standards. As long as the conduct doesn't violate the law they're in the clear. If you don't like the terms of service, create/support/use another one. If the demand for such a change in policy is great enough. They may change it back on their own anyway.
>Defending backpage What's their reasoning?
>Muh emotional appeals Try to calm down user
Easton Butler
The only way to stop them from simply destroying the internet and halting progress for another 50 years is to kill all the old people.
>i'm scared of computers and thats why we have to ban them globally >young people should work for 50 years straight so they become as broken as we are >i am old and refuse to learn new things therefore i'm always right.
Lets just get rid of them.
Jordan Morris
FUCKING ELSA AND SPIDERMAN?!?!?!?!?!?!
Kill yourself.
You're the worst kind of human.
Nolan Scott
They do that now, already, through the tech companies.
Andrew Lewis
>You're a pedophile if you don't agree with my baseless emotionally rooted claims! This is antifa tier, except replace their buzzwords with 'pedophile'
Juan Parker
Beholden to the constitution? The constitution protects their right to do these things. What do you mean?
Gabriel Peterson
...
Colton Bailey
This is uncharted territory. A new precedent must be made because these companies have gone too long using us as guinea pigs and stealing all our information. They need to be brought to heel
Brody Rivera
>BACKPAGE FOR HAVING CHILD SEX TRAFFICKING what's next, skinwalkers are selling them there?
Angel Johnson
Private entites policing speech on their platform is diffrent from giving the state power to shut down private entities because of their politics.
You morons do realize that most of right wing media is owned by like less that 5 people. So if the democrats come into power, what is going to stop them from breaking up those entities using the precedent you guys are in favour of?
Chase Thompson
>outsourced freedom of speech The platform was made without government assistance, in fact in spite of it.
Mason Evans
...
Aaron Price
Translation: politicians want more donations to stop the shakedown.
GOOGLE IS ARGUING THAT CHILD SEX SLAVE ADS ARE CONSIDERED FREE SPEECH
Jeremiah Morris
...
Adam Watson
>have begun exploring possible legislative action against Facebook and other tech giants they'll drop it after facebook makes generous donations to the RNC and DNC, these people have no actual values
Blake White
Zero. This possibility is why the government asked Google to create Google+. The masses would switch over immediately without interrupting their narcissistic obsession for a minute.
Landon Gutierrez
...
Michael Mitchell
>They're trying to shape the scope of discourse >They are using their services to manipulate the populace into thinking things Every company has bias, because the people running it have their own ideals. The amount that their own personal ideals reflect their company policy. Relates to how it may effect the profit margin, and willingness of the company to accept that. Before internet, communities had church leaders, and others who did the same thing - spread their own ideological agenda. Competing powers fighting for influence is apart of democratic and non-democratic society. There is no alternative where we all hold hands and sing. The world is cruel, one filled with endless struggle and competition.