Facebook Censors Campaign Video from Brilliant GOP Candidate

I think that the removal can be much easier explained by the fact that it includes graphic material of the genocide.

 

Do you really think NYT is not a publically traded stock? Your excuse doesn't hold water. "social networking company" is a platform so that they are not held responsible for what their posters say for libel laws and everyone gets to post, or they are a publication and have to censor what people post because they can be held responsible for libel.

 

First libel laws are relevant to what they can safely print or publish or facilitate, but utterly irrelevant to what they must. You are looking at this ass backwards. Companies don't need an excuse to limit how or when they are used as a platform whether they are private or public or soul proprietorships. ITS THEIR COMPANY, THEIR PROPERTY THEIR PLATFORM. Its not your company, your property or your platform and they owe neither your or anyone else any explanation, let alone a consistent or fair one, before depriving you of what is not yours to use in the first play. The only exceptions may be those noted in civil rights laws. Political content, controversial content or political association of contributors are not protected classes under any state or federal civil rights laws. A republican congress can moan or groan all they want about 'political favoritism' or double standards at Facebook, but it is entirely legal.

If you want a right to get your letter to the editor published in the New York Times , or your page secured on Facebook. Buy a controlling ownership interest and fire those employees who stand in your way.

What is not legal is for Facebook is to engage in, is anti-competitive conduct that effectively turns them into a monopoly in their market niche. Your real potentially legally winning argument here has nothing to do with libel or expired Fairness Doctrine Its that Facebook may have established such preeminence as a social media company, that is essentially a monopoly and thus has some extraordinary duties to perform certain services as long as it has near total control of its 'market' if it does not want its position or policies examined more closely by regulators or Congress. If it wants to itself into a politically liberal social media company, it has to be prepared to have its branches gut off by a federal government that wants other social media companies to get some sunlight under their expansive canopy.

 

That is good news....

 

Trump should go there an campaign for her. He is 8-9 when he does but it is Cali though.

 

Facebook standards are arbitrary and since the censors are all raging liberals it hurts most conservative republican candidates

But not this republican candidate this time

She got a lot of attention and favorble views worth millions and forced Facebook and Twitter to back down