Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Or would regulating them leave us in a far worse situation?

I dunno. We better ask the Mods first...

Most social media is regulated one way or another. I think the system works fine, for the most part.

Would you feel the same way if instead of morons like Alex Jones, it was shows like The Young Turks that were getting banned?

I think they can regulate themselves just fine. I would be very uncomfortable if the government began regulating social media websites, which are private enterprises. In fact, if the government began to regulate who could and couldn't use these platforms rather than the companies themselves, I would consider it an infringement of free speech, as they would be halting the ability of these websites to exercise their free speech in choosing who to allow and disallow onto their platforms.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Would you feel the same way if instead of morons like Alex Jones, it was shows like The Young Turks that were getting banned?
I absolutely despise Young Turks, so yes, I would feel the same way.

Fair enough.

Originally posted by BackFire
I think they can regulate themselves just fine. I would be very uncomfortable if the government began regulating social media websites, which are private enterprises. In fact, if the government began to regulate who could and couldn't use these platforms rather than the companies themselves, I would consider it an infringement of free speech, as they would be halting the ability of these websites to exercise their free speech in choosing who to allow and disallow onto their platforms.

To me one "regulates themselves just fine" when the rules they put up are equally applied all across the board to all users. At least that should be part of fine regulation. Making sure some aren't allowed to skirt the rules.

And although it's not a social media platform, Patreon just booted a dude who under their own terms of service did nothing wrong. They booted him cuz mastercard told them to do so. And as we move more and more away from paper money to digital currency you will see shit like this more and more.

Government regulation would be disturbing, but yet it seems the road we are on is also disturbing.

Self regulation is mostly fine, maybe some general rules of proper conduct should be put forth that most everyone can agree on, but even then, probably not necessary. eg Facebook acted like shit, they got called out; now they're scrambling to right themselves.

As far as Patreon kicking out Islamophobe Robert Spencer, they're a private business; I thought private businesses were supposed to be able to do business with who they wish?

Originally posted by Robtard
As far as Patreon kicking out Islamophobe Robert Spencer, they're a private business; I thought private businesses were supposed to be able to do business with who they wish?
Just to clarify, it was not Patreon that broke ties with Robert Spencer, it was Mastercard that stopped giving Robert Spencer service, and that cut his ties with Patreon.

I was just going with what Surt said. MasterCard is also a private business no? They turn down people all the time.

Originally posted by Surtur
Or would regulating them leave us in a far worse situation?

We don't want the govt sticking their hands into this pie.

In the case of patreon it wasn't the fault of said service but of mastercard. So regulating patreon wouldn't have done anything here.

What's going to end up happening is that certain social media platforms will come under closer scrutiny as bannings and other things occur due to the definition of publishers vs platforms.

Not to mention this does leave open a certain niche for those that are kicked off said platforms to build their own.

Originally posted by Robtard
I was just going with what Surt said. MasterCard is also a private business no? They turn down people all the time.

It's true, but I do see it as disturbing since in the future currency will be digital which means these places will have more power than ever.

And then it gets messy when you have the government coming and saying Trump can't ban people on twitter, etc.

That's a private company too.

Originally posted by Surtur
To me one "regulates themselves just fine" when the rules they put up are equally applied all across the board to all users. At least that should be part of fine regulation. Making sure some aren't allowed to skirt the rules.

And although it's not a social media platform, Patreon just booted a dude who under their own terms of service did nothing wrong. They booted him cuz mastercard told them to do so. And as we move more and more away from paper money to digital currency you will see shit like this more and more.

Government regulation would be disturbing, but yet it seems the road we are on is also disturbing.

I don't find a private business deciding who can and cannot use their service to be particularly disturbing. They have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. If you or any other user have a problem with a decision they make, you have the power to make your voice heard via boycotting or making a stink about it on twitter. Government regulation would not solve anything in this regard, in fact I think it would probably make social media even more political and instances like what you mention even more likely, as such choices would probably be part of the governmental ebb and flow of which party is in control and which isn't.

EDIT: I guess I can see your point about mastercard deciding not to allow someone to use their service, it could potentially set a dangerous precident I suppose, but for now when you also have Visa and AMEX and Paypall being available, it's not a particularly big deal.

I fully believe people should be able to do business with who they want.

On the other hand I don't want to eventually have corporations have nigh total control of us.

And if the government does their job and doesn't allow monopolies to form, that won't be a problem.

Too late

Anti-trust?

Of course Social Media needs regulating, in all sorts of ways, to stop it using your data for nefarious means. To stop it being used as social control, engineering for nefarious purposes etc. As ever the problem is who can you trust to do it?

I know who I'd trust.

375ENQbru8s

But then how is it okay for the government to tell someone on a private platform who they can or can't block lol. Why is this okay, if we're gonna go into "private biznass" mode for this.

I would say it is if said "Private Platform" is taking Government Money.

There are already inherent systems of regulation in place on a multitude of social media, however if the question was a metaphor for governmental regulation then I would argue against it.