Ever wonder why democratic campaign ads don’t seem to be tampered with nearly as much? Or at all? Bloomberg news has already admitted to being an agent of the democrats. Good for them. Maybe Google should stop with the charade and do the same?
Where’s your evidence that what you stated here is true?
2 Likes
It’s not my premise. Google admits to removing Trump campaign ads. They just won’t tell us why. They should simply say: “We support the DNC” and be done with it.
1 Like
Yes it is your premise. Unless you believe we are all entitled to use the platform of private entities for our speech now. Do you believe that?
Is Trump entitled to Google’s platform in order for “Free speech” to be achieved?
And? Their platform.
You are not entitled to that information. Those who host the ads might be-is there something in writing that entitles Youtube users to be notified WHY their content was removed?
That is the reason in your imagination. But even if it were true, is Google/Youtube not allowed to support whom they will?
Is “free speech” now defined by content allowed on Youtube?
I don’t have anything to ad to the 60 minutes story. It’s pretty damning. It’s what CNN would call a “bombshell.” I don’t need evidence because I’m not trying to prove anything. I posted a link and gave my opinion of it. You are entitled to yours. Even if its wrong. Fair enough?
The CBS story is nowhere close to enough data…nor even the right kind of data… to back up your statement that “conservative ads/sites” get “messed with” more than “non-conservative ads/sites”.
And no it is not “fair enough”. If one wants to level an accusation, one should at least show a basic understanding as to how to back it up.
1 Like
Yes. I think that’s a huge part of it. Access to information is critical. The masters of the universe can decide for us what we are allowed to see. I think its dangerous. And no retort on your part will change that. Is that acceptable to you?
I guess this should not have happened? Violation of freedom of speech?
Nothing like stating your political opponent should be hanged.
1 Like
We’re going to disagree on this. I’m cool with it. Are you? BTW. I’m getting bored with this. 
Of course you’re going to disagree with it because you can’t answer the question as to how you’d prove the assertion.
Such a shame we went from teaching students how to think to teaching to the test…
1 Like
So what’s your solution?
1 Like
Rail about it on a CEC website that the “Tech Gods” have somehow overlooked?
1 Like
Okay, it’s done then. As I said. This back and forth is going nowhere and starting to bore me.
As Forrest Gump once said. “That’s all I’m gonna say about that.”
Has anyone seen a Mayor Pete ad on here yet?
1 Like
Of course it’s done.
You know, it’s no shame to say you don’t know how to prove systematic bias. Very few people do.
It is kind of a shame to admit you don’t care that you don’t know how…
5 Likes
Start with massive shaming and media exposure. Maybe let them explain themselves to congress? This corruption has only recently been exposed. Maybe Sean will do a story on it.
The real threat to Republican speech is if it were required to be factual, or on tangible policy policy proposals.
Things would get quiet in a hurry. I think anybody with eyes knows that’s why these ads get pulled, they are part of a pattern of fabulism in Republican media, and a few tepid efforts to rein that in had them frakjbgcout because they are so dependent on fantasy and falsehoods.
2 Likes
What does Congress have to do with this?
1 Like
He can’t because conservatives are being forced off the air, remember?
1 Like
