Trudeau's Communist Regime sets new horizon

[ExFlyer]

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

The colour of the sun on my planet is "People were banned from social media for talking about the BSL4 lab in Wuhan and the MSM in our country never talked about it. In the end, we found out that the guy who pimped the bat-pangolin-human theory to us, which our MSM favoured, is the same guy who approved gain-of-function research on the coronavirus in the aforementioned Wuhan BSL4 lab. Imagine that. How stupid/credulous would I have to be to consider any of those sources legitimate right about now? Only a total jackass would do that, right?"

I will admit one thing though: for you to give any consideration whatsoever to what I said above would require you to endure all sorts of cognitive dissonance, and it's not in you. I know from experience that you're incapable of re-evaluating what you believe in with all your heart. 

Maybe you should just ask yourself if you really should believe in the CBC and CTV with all your heart. Have you never in your lifetime caught them saying something that initially seemed counterintuitive, and was later proven to be "folly"?

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/u-s-intel-report-identified-3-wuhan-lab-researchers-who-n1268327

^Weird, hey? These guys don't get sick of working with bats all day, they actually go to the wetmarket and bring them home to eat them I guess. 

Buddy, I'm the last guy on earth who only reads things that support my own views.

Do you think that I want to believe 9/11 conspiracy theorists? I like the US more than I like islamic terrorists in case you hadn't noticed. I just can't fully commit to believing that WTC 7 was consumed by fire to the extent that it became the first steel/concrete structure in the history of the world to collapse due to fire, and yet somehow officials in NYC were able to predict that collapse to within minutes, or seconds even. 

I've been sitting on the 9/11 fence for over 20 years now. I can handle my share of cognitive dissonance, thank you very much.

"We" found out? Or another opinion story?

So, you are OK with CBC and CTV being cut off social media?  But not others?

Bottom line, I truly hope Meta and Google at al cut off any Canadian news sources from using them and paying them.

Want to share news, well, ya cannot do it on social media anymore so, that is good too. Let social media become social media again instead of a political tool.

 

 

Edited August 1, 2023 by ExFlyer

[herbie]

You're trying to make a point and actually read news on Facebook.

Asides from a means to chat with distant friends it's all lies. Every damn thing posted on it, bullshit. Do you really think you can buy a 256 TB SSD for $29.95 or an electric wheelchair/scooter for your granma for $40? That any company has 'so many unsold motor homes' they're giving one away to the 5th person that clicks?

Or the scam I saw last week where a US Govt Agency has a "website" that's a FB link with pictures of FedEx delivering boxes of "Excess grant money" in cash to your doorstep absolutely free?

FB's such unethical crooks they'll take anyone's ad money and only check it out when someone reports it to see it's a scam or fake or spyware... then the crook just changes the poster name and pay another $100 to repost the shit.
 

Or one of those absolute dupes that believe the Globe&Mail and  New York Times are all lies and that gizzmobob,ru link on FB is the real truth. (you don't need to tell us...)

Edited August 1, 2023 by herbie

[BeaverFever]

10 hours ago, West said:

Just in time for an election you now can no longer view news on Facebook

Just in time for what election?

It’s Facebook’s decision to block news.
 

Besides you shouldn’t rely on social media algorithms to decide what news stories you do and don’t get to see.  Probably a win for society. 

[West]

1 hour ago, BeaverFever said:

Just in time for what election?

It’s Facebook’s decision to block news.
 

Besides you shouldn’t rely on social media algorithms to decide what news stories you do and don’t get to see.  Probably a win for society. 

So I have to rely on communists who believe cops are hunting black people to tell me what's going on? 

Psychos who rely solely on the Canadian major news outlets afr making society unbearable. Would do us all a world of good if these people were locked in the looney bin

Edited August 2, 2023 by West

[BeaverFever]

Just now, West said:

So I have to rely on communists who believe cops are hunting black people to tell me what's going on? 

Psychos who rely solely on the Canadian major news outlets. 

Huh? You don’t even make sense. I don’t think you even understand the issue. 

The only thing that’s changing is the you will have to get the news articles you read from the news source itself instead of fed to you by Facebook. The news articles aren’t going away.

[CdnFox]

7 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Why don’t you buy a newspaper?

For the same reason that i don't use oil lamps to light my home.  Progress has made for much better options.

Quote

 

Let’s say you have a company that makes hubcaps. When a big Chinese, American or Russian company comes into your business and takes your stock and sells it without paying you, would you be okay with that?

 

If i left my hubcaps on the sidewalk and said "Free for the taking" i wouldn't blame the russians or chinese.  These stories are all freely avaialbe, no paywall

 

And to crush your analogy further - it aint' the russians or chinese doing the stealing - it's everyday people "stealing" and posting stories, not the social media company.

You're way off base here.

[Michael Hardner]

14 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

Right on social media, screw them and do not pay for something people, and even the media itself was using you for.

Your points are well founded, however consider that media, unlike other industries, is intrinsic to our democracy itself.  It has to be healthy, and as such media have always had an elevated status as well as more control and care by the government.

Monopoly and foreign ownership here have serious effects.

We wouldn't allow China to buy Bell Globe Media, Postmedia, etc.

[ExFlyer]

11 hours ago, West said:

So I have to rely on communists who believe cops are hunting black people to tell me what's going on? 

Psychos who rely solely on the Canadian major news outlets afr making society unbearable. Would do us all a world of good if these people were locked in the looney bin

Nope, they expect you keyboard warriors to seek out your news from other sources and not from Meta and Google et al. The sources can be from whomever suits your story, so does not have to be Canadian.

[ExFlyer]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Your points are well founded, however consider that media, unlike other industries, is intrinsic to our democracy itself.  It has to be healthy, and as such media have always had an elevated status as well as more control and care by the government.

Monopoly and foreign ownership here have serious effects.

We wouldn't allow China to buy Bell Globe Media, Postmedia, etc.

I cannot fully agree. Whenever we have "more control and care by the government.", especially of the free press, it cannot be "free", it is another government agency.

Therefore, social media should be punished for what users are doing (or not doing)? Canadian media pays Meta and Google to be on their system and government now says social media should pay Canadian news organizations because they are on there on their own accord or because users link to Canadian news sources?

Monopolies always have serious effects regardless in what business it is in.

And, why would we (whomever "we" is) from buying our news organizations? We sell them everything else LOL

 

[Michael Hardner]

2 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

1. I cannot fully agree. Whenever we have "more control and care by the government.", especially of the free press, it cannot be "free", it is another government agency.

2. Therefore, social media should be punished for what users are doing (or not doing)? Canadian media pays Meta and Google to be on their system and government now says social media should pay Canadian news organizations because they are on there on their own accord or because users link to Canadian news sources?

3. Monopolies always have serious effects regardless in what business it is in.

4. And, why would we (whomever "we" is) from buying our news organizations? We sell them everything else LOL

 

1. Kind of a slippery slope argument here, and you need to acknowledge the facts that the government have been in some measure of control of media since there was government, in this country and pretty much everywhere actually.  So I don't know what your benchmark is here.  You have to give me an example of a public sphere that was free of any control I think.

It's not that you're wrong but the absolute viewpoint that government control means no free media seems extreme sorry.

And this is about revenues and local ownership, as has been pointed out.  It could easily be seen as a form of tariff - an instrument which lots of left and right folks just love.

2.  Yes you are restating it.

3.  I'm confused.  You think monopolies have "serious effects" - so isn't Facebook a monopoly of ... Facebook ?  If you don't like Monopolies and you don't want government control what do you want ?

4. Why would we from buying ?  I think you missed some words here.

[ExFlyer]

2 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Kind of a slippery slope argument here, and you need to acknowledge the facts that the government have been in some measure of control of media since there was government, in this country and pretty much everywhere actually.  So I don't know what your benchmark is here.  You have to give me an example of a public sphere that was free of any control I think.

It's not that you're wrong but the absolute viewpoint that government control means no free media seems extreme sorry.

And this is about revenues and local ownership, as has been pointed out.  It could easily be seen as a form of tariff - an instrument which lots of left and right folks just love.

2.  Yes you are restating it.

3.  I'm confused.  You think monopolies have "serious effects" - so isn't Facebook a monopoly of ... Facebook ?  If you don't like Monopolies and you don't want government control what do you want ?

4. Why would we from buying ?  I think you missed some words here.

My point is that government making social media pay for what people are re posting and what news media are actually paying social media for to supposedly help Canadian media is wrong.

That social media cutting off Canadian news sources as a result is fine by me. If you want local and national news, go to their websites.

Facebook is one social media source, not a monopoly but more like Bell and Rogers....just one, a big one yes but one of.

Can't remember what I was trying to say in #4 except that if we wanted Canadian news, we could be buying subscriptions for the newspapers and watching local tv news instead of whining about its biases and misinformation.

 

[Michael Hardner]

14 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

1. My point is that government making social media pay for what people are re posting and what news media are actually paying social media for to supposedly help Canadian media is wrong.

2. Facebook is one social media source, not a monopoly but more like Bell and Rogers....just one, a big one yes but one of.

3. Can't remember what I was trying to say in #4 except that if we wanted Canadian news, we could be buying subscriptions for the newspapers and watching local tv news instead of whining about its biases and misinformation.

 

1. "Wrong" is a strong word to use in a context of complicated transactions - money and computer messages I mean.  Is it wrong for the government to block US TV networks from showing commercials ?  Is it wrong to deny the ability of foreign governments to buy our media ?
2.  Maybe - but Bell & Rogers are services that are far more alike than Facebook and ... anything.  It's a media analysis question, not relevant so much except if you DON'T agree that Facebook is a monopoly you should at least see it's part of a small oligopoly.  
3.  Yeah.  In our house we pay for Bell, Canadaland, Toronto Star, the Globe and Mail as well as donating to some other sites.  If you don't pay then you pay by sitting through advertising.  If that goes offshore Canadian media dies.  If Canadian media dies we have no national public sphere.  This is why Mulroney negotiated media OUT of the FTA.

[ExFlyer]

7 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. "Wrong" is a strong word to use in a context of complicated transactions - money and computer messages I mean.  Is it wrong for the government to block US TV networks from showing commercials ?  Is it wrong to deny the ability of foreign governments to buy our media ?
2.  Maybe - but Bell & Rogers are services that are far more alike than Facebook and ... anything.  It's a media analysis question, not relevant so much except if you DON'T agree that Facebook is a monopoly you should at least see it's part of a small oligopoly.  
3.  Yeah.  In our house we pay for Bell, Canadaland, Toronto Star, the Globe and Mail as well as donating to some other sites.  If you don't pay then you pay by sitting through advertising.  If that goes offshore Canadian media dies.  If Canadian media dies we have no national public sphere.  This is why Mulroney negotiated media OUT of the FTA.

I stand by "My point is that government making social media pay for what people are re posting and what news media are actually paying social media for to supposedly help Canadian media is wrong. " comment.

When people re-post, that is not social media fault or doing. When news organizations pay social media to be on and advertise on their sites, that is not the social media fault or doing. If advertisers drop off the newspapers and tv news, perhaps the tv and papers need to look at why they are losing advertisers. I used to get the Ottawa Citizen and Sun, for different perspective but now they both belong to one owner and other than the change of headline, the stories are identical. Oh and they are fewer and fewer pages as well. So, I quit them both. These are decisions, personal and business that they made and made me make.

Now the media is saying it is losing business because advertisers are jumping off them and something should be done, the government decided to make social media pay for what people and news organizations are doing is wrong. No other way to place it.

Our newspapers and tv news is pitiful compared to the US and the US has the same issues with social media as we do.

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, ExFlyer said:

1. When people re-post, that is not social media fault or doing.

2. Now the media is saying it is losing business because advertisers are jumping off them and something should be done, the government decided to make social media pay for what people and news organizations are doing is wrong. No other way to place it.

3. Our newspapers and tv news is pitiful compared to the US and the US has the same issues with social media as we do.

1. No but they benefit from it, so why not ask them to share ?
2. Ok.
3. Yes, but they don't have another US to come and take over their media.

Good points though.