BREAKING: Parler Sues Amazon After Being Suspended

[Crimson Dynamo]

https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2021/01/GettyImages-1230527724.jpg?auto=format&fit=crop&ar=16%3A9&ixlib=react-9.0.3&w=970&q=75&dpr=1
https://www.ctvnews.ca/polopoly_fs/1.4554880.1566162190!/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_960/image.jpg

On Monday, the left wing social media site Parler filed a lawsuit against Amazon,
claiming that Amazon’s suspension of Parler violated antitrust laws and
breached the contract between the two entities.

As Parler went dark Monday morning, CEO John Matze told Fox News that the
site would try to “get back online as quickly as possible,” but warned that
the platform could be down for as long as a week.

Reuters reported, “Amazon suspended Parler from its Amazon Web Services
(AWS) unit for violating AWS’s terms of services by failing to effectively deal
with a steady increase in violent content, according to an email by an AWS
Trust and Safety team to Parler, seen by Reuters. An Amazon spokesperson
confirmed the letter was authentic.”

https://www.dailywire.com/news/parler-sues-amazon-after-being-suspended

[The Slim Reaper]

"left wing social media site parler" :joker:

[The Slim Reaper]

It's like threatening to get the police involved on here if you get banned, and no one would ever do that, I'm sure :nono:

[Tom4784]

Aww, are the nazis upset that their insurrection app got delisted? Aw diddums.

[Scarlett.]

Again, a private hosting company reserves the right to deny service. Parler has no ground to stand on.

[DouglasS]

More censorship. Fake reasons as well ‘violent content’ is on every single social media platform...

[GiRTh]

So this the new whinge, is it? They're trying to censor us. Brilliant :laugh:

[Tom4784]

So this the new whinge, is it? They're trying to censor us. Brilliant :laugh:

Trying to inform the right wing what censorship is, is like trying to teach a donkey how to play Beethoven's 29th on the piano.

[DouglasS]

People need to stop being snowflakes and so sensitive :skull:

If you want to get ahead in work or whatever in life you need to be tougher and just get on with it instead of just being a forever victim. Crying over words Donald Trump, or whoever else (Katie Hopkins or Farage) is just not worth your time. Complaining about it also. These people get ahead in life because they’re ambitious and spend less time whining and being ‘woke’

If someone disagrees with your views on LGBT, politics, religion or whatever stop crying about it and move on

[Scarlett.]

People need to stop being snowflakes and so sensitive :skull:

If you want to get ahead in work or whatever in life you need to be tougher and just get on with it instead of just being a forbeee victim. Crying over words Donald Trump, or whoever else (Katie Hopkins or Farage) is just not worth your time. Complaining about it also. These people get ahead in life because they’re ambitious and spend less time whining and being ‘woke’

If someone disagrees with your views on LGBT, politics, religion stop crying about it

It's funny to see right wingers call others 'snowflakes' after this past week

[GiRTh]

Trying to inform the right wing what censorship is, is like trying to teach a donkey how to play Beethoven's 29th on the piano.True.

Its not even original though. They've been claiming censorship whenever an arsehole get banned for being an arsehole. Its quite comical to see this argument trotted out again.:laugh:

[Tom4784]

People need to stop being snowflakes and so sensitive :skull:

If you want to get ahead in work or whatever in life you need to be tougher and just get on with it instead of just being a forbeee victim. Crying over words Donald Trump, or whoever else (Katie Hopkins or Farage) is just not worth your time. Complaining about it also. These people get ahead in life because they’re ambitious and spend less time whining and being ‘woke’

You've been screaming about censorship over Donald Trump, a man with a press conference room in his house, because he was banned on Twitter. Can you really call anyone else a snowflake? Can you really accuse anyone of being a victim if you're pushing a narrative that the right are being censored when they clearly aren't?

Your post is nothing but rampant projection.

[Crimson Dynamo]

People need to stop being snowflakes and so sensitive :skull:

If you want to get ahead in work or whatever in life you need to be tougher and just get on with it instead of just being a forever victim. Crying over words Donald Trump, or whoever else (Katie Hopkins or Farage) is just not worth your time. Complaining about it also. These people get ahead in life because they’re ambitious and spend less time whining and being ‘woke’

If someone disagrees with your views on LGBT, politics, religion or whatever stop crying about it and move on

good post, hard truth is always a difficult truth to own

[Tom4784]

It's funny to see right wingers call others 'snowflakes' after this past week

Yes, considering they are so snowflakey that they tried to launch a coup when they lost an election, remember how the right accused Hillary supporters of sour grapes in 2016? You just can't make up the complete and utter hypocrisy.

[Captain.Remy]

MAGA supporters being the biggest snowflakes ever since last week is so satisfying, and we love to see it :love:

[The Slim Reaper]

As someone who isn't a capitalist, it's baffling to see capitalists not understand how capitalism works.

[DouglasS]

As someone who isn't a capitalist, it's baffling to see capitalists not understand how capitalism works.

It’s just as interesting to see people who are against capitalism applaud it when it suits their beliefs

[The Slim Reaper]

It’s just as interesting to see people who are against capitalism applaud it when it suits their beliefs

Applauding and understanding are two different things.

[DouglasS]

Applauding and understanding are two different things.

Who doesn’t understand capitalism?

[The Slim Reaper]

Who doesn’t understand capitalism?

Anyone calling this censorship, for starters.

[DouglasS]

Anyone calling this censorship, for starters.

Well maybe it’s actually you who does not know the meaning of censorship or capitalism.

Here is the definition:

Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information, on the basis that such material is considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or "inconvenient." Censorship can be conducted by governments, private institutions, and other controlling bodies.


Stating I think something is censorship does not mean I do not know what capitalism is.. they are not directly correlated...

What a ridiculous assumption you’ve come to. It’s like quoting someone who disagrees with meat eating and saying they don’t know what capitalism is... they can go hand in hand

[The Slim Reaper]

Well maybe it’s actually you who does not know the meaning of censorship

Here is the definition:

Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information, on the basis that such material is considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or "inconvenient." Censorship can be conducted by governments, private institutions, and other controlling bodies.

Stating I think something is censorship does not mean I do not know what capitalism in... they can go hand in hand, I never said they were indirectly correlated - you assumed so..

You miss the whole point, and not for the first time. They haven't kicked him off their platforms because of speech. He's said some horrific things without any action being taken against him and the maga's. They've kicked him off because supporting nazi's/coups/insurrections is not something corporations want to be seen openly doing. Has a habit of affecting the bottom line.

[DouglasS]

You miss the whole point, and not for the first time. They haven't kicked him off their platforms because of speech. He's said some horrific things without any action being taken against him and the maga's. They've kicked him off because supporting nazi's/coups/insurrections is not something corporations want to be seen openly doing. Has a habit of affecting the bottom line.

You are missing the point I am not denying it’s capitalism at all, it is capitalism. But it’s also censorship. It can be both...

[The Slim Reaper]

You are missing the point I am not denying it’s capitalism at all, it is capitalism. But it’s also censorship. It can be both...

It can, but it isn't. If Trumps coup attempt had been successful and he was now El Presidente, those same companies would be up trumps arse, because he would have all the power. They wouldn't be making a stand against him, which shows it's a profit/reputational issue, not speech.

[DouglasS]

You miss the whole point, and not for the first time. They haven't kicked him off their platforms because of speech. He's said some horrific things without any action being taken against him and the maga's. They've kicked him off because supporting nazi's/coups/insurrections is not something corporations want to be seen openly doing. Has a habit of affecting the bottom line.

It can, but it isn't. If Trumps coup attempt had been successful and he was now El Presidente, those same companies would be up trumps arse, because he would have all the power. They wouldn't be making a stand against him, which shows it's a profit/reputational issue, not speech.

Look at the definition of censorship again. It is not just purely speech that makes Something qualify as censorship. It is censorship. Prevent public communication can qualify as censorship which if this is not based on speech it is based on public communication..

[DouglasS]

FYI

Here is the definition:

Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information, on the basis that such material is considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or "inconvenient." Censorship can be conducted by governments, private institutions, and other controlling bodies.

[The Slim Reaper]

Look at the definition of censorship again. It is not just purely speech that makes Something qualify as censorship. It is censorship

No, censorship would have meant him being banned years ago, capitalism means it took an attempted coup.

As I pointed out in one of the other threads in reply to you, he wasn't censored when he called mexicans, rapists, and described folks chanting "jews will not replace us," as "very fine people." Also, he's the president and internationally known/loved/loathed. He can still communicate, just not on certain platforms. The founding fathers laid out an example where speech could no longer be considered free or protected by the 1st amendment, and that was shouting fire in a crowded theatre. What Trump did is far worse.

[DouglasS]

FYI

No, censorship would have meant him being banned years ago, capitalism means it took an attempted coup.

As I pointed out in one of the other threads in reply to you, he wasn't censored when he called mexicans, rapists, and described folks chanting "jews will not replace us," as "very fine people." Also, he's the president and internationally known/loved/loathed. He can still communicate, just not on certain platforms. The founding fathers laid out an example where speech could no longer be considered free or protected by the 1st amendment, and that was shouting fire in a crowded theatre. What Trump did is far worse.

Censorship doesn’t have a time span.. by that logic anyone who has been censored before hasn’t truly been censored if they had past history of being controversial.. that is not true.. just because he wasn’t censored in the past doesn’t mean he’s not being censored now..

The definition is clear as day, regardless of whether you agree with censorship or not all you genuinely need is basic literacy to see this is censorship going by the definition. It Does not necessarily mean you have to disagree with, some censorship is arguably good :shrug:

[The Slim Reaper]

Finally, all of those companies will have a terms of service. If you breach that, just like here, and get banned, you're not being censored. I'm guessing inciting violence/riots/hate speech etc, aren't allowed under the ToS.

[reece(:]

the left wing social media site

had me.

But then I saw the source was some blog post. :joker::joker:

[The Slim Reaper]

Censorship doesn’t have a time span.. by that logic anyone who has been censored before hasn’t truly been censored if they had past history of being controversial.. that is not true.. just because he wasn’t censored in the past doesn’t mean he’s not being censored now..

The definition is clear as day, regardless of whether you agree with censorship or not all you genuinely need is basic literacy to see this is censorship going by the definition. It Does not necessarily mean you have to disagree with, some censorship is arguably good :shrug:

No. He had his free speech, he's been banned as a result of how he used it. There is no such thing as consequence-free speech. I've explained a number of different reasons why you're wrong imo here. We'll see when trump takes these companies to court whether or not it is a free speech issue. If we're both still around, would you like a make a bet on how that issue is decided in court? Charitable donation to a foodbank?

[Scarlett.]

When it comes down to it, Amazon isn't legally obligated to give anyone server space, they have the right to refuse anyone to use their servers, because they are their servers.

[Nicky91]

No. He had his free speech, he's been banned as a result of how he used it. There is no such thing as consequence-free speech. I've explained a number of different reasons why you're wrong imo here. We'll see when trump takes these companies to court whether or not it is a free speech issue. If we're both still around, would you like a make a bet on how that issue is decided in court? Charitable donation to a foodbank?

yup he had many chances to post in a better way, people like him have no rights now at free speech, if you only abuse that for the worse


Pence for example posts in a correct manner and he gets to stay on social media

[Crimson Dynamo]

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2021/01/11/15/37837370-9133377-The_journalist_tweeted_Sunday_to_accuse_the_tech_g iants_of_feign-a-7_1610377755526.jpg

[Crimson Dynamo]

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2021/01/12/08/37881620-9134897-Greenwald_tweeted_Monday_to_pan_liberals_as_overwh elmingly_suppo-a-4_1610439972249.jpg

[Mystic Mock]

More censorship. Fake reasons as well ‘violent content’ is on every single social media platform...

It's because allegedly Parler weren't banning the members making the violent content rather than there were violent content on Parler, because as you rightly say all Social Media (and Forums tbh) would be banned.

[Nicky91]

It's because allegedly Parler weren't banning the members making the violent content rather than there were violent content on Parler, because as you rightly say all Social Media (and Forums tbh) would be banned.

Parler lacked the discipline to take on ''violent content'' so it is rightfully removed from the internet

every social media has their rules/policies and i totally support Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Youtube to take on all far right people who do nothing but post hateful nasty content (whom abuse their social media status for the worse, which is not what social media is meant for)


also calling it ''censorship'' how ridiculous :joker: the people who continue to spread more hate in the world, do not deserve to have freedom of speech if they just abuse it

[Crimson Dynamo]

It's because allegedly Parler weren't banning the members making the violent content rather than there were violent content on Parler, because as you rightly say all Social Media (and Forums tbh) would be banned.

and who specifically was doing the judging what content was "violent" and then checking that the person was not banned?

who is the judge here and what are their credentials?:conf:

[Tom4784]

Saying something is censorship when it isn't won't make it censorship. Repeating something incorrect because it benefits your agenda does not validate it.

[DouglasS]

Saying something is censorship when it isn't won't make it censorship. Repeating something incorrect because it benefits your agenda does not validate it.

I am just using the dictionary’s definition of censorship and using that as evidence... obviously you know more than the dictionary and everyone else.

I thought as an author you would understand the meanings of words such as censorship, and understand definitions and meanings.

Just because it’s censorship doesn’t mean it’s always a bad thing, a lot of things get censored for good reasons

[Tom4784]

I am just using the dictionary’s definition of censorship and using that as evidence... obviously you know more than the dictionary and everyone else.

I thought as an author you would understand the meanings of words such as censorship, and understand definitions and meanings.

Just because it’s censorship doesn’t mean it’s always a bad thing, a lot of things get censored for good reasons

I have a far better understanding than you, it seems.

You're not grasping the concept beyond the basic idea because doing so invalidates your point. Freedom of Speech is just that, you are free to speak and believe what you want to believe but freedom of speech does not entitle you to use a private platform against the owner's wishes.

Imagine you own a house and and you invite someone in but they are destructive and and they break something, it would be within your rights to tell them to get out, breaking the TOS of a social media site is no different. You agree to follow the rules of the site and when you do not, it's up to them if they want to keep you around.

[Vicky.]

"left wing social media site parler" :joker:

That was my first thought, not gunna lie :D

I kind of see where cases like this are coming from,. but at the end of the day, amazon is a private company, and can ban whoever they see fit, for any reason tbh.