While I may agree with him on certain points, before he calls for it to be broken up because it's too big he needs to take a look in his own backyard.
MSNBC is owned by 'Comcast'. Comcast is a hellva' lot larger (it could be considered by some in itself a monopoly). HERE'S A HUGE LIST OF IT'S HOLDINGS. Among it's holdings is 'NBC Universal'. AMONG IT'S HOLDINGS include not only Universal film studios but six cable channels, several theme parks and the streaming service called 'Peacock' and another called 'Vudu' it bought shares into from Walmart. As well as expanding it's tentacles into Europe.
Granted Mark Zuckerberg, who owns 29.3% of Facebook (including Instagram) has greater control then any other single person over at 'Comcast'. This still doesn't mean he exerts near the influence 'Comcast' has over what people see and hear. Facebook's influence comes from the people who use it. Therein lies the problem. Who gets to control what people are exposed to?
I don't think the problem lies solely at the feet of Facebook as Joe would have you believe. According to Wikipedia Fox Corperation, is owned by the Murdoch family via a family trust with 39% interest.. Another behemoth able to influence people. They along with dozens of other social media sites and media companies who also had a hand in stirring the pot.
What I'm trying to say here is Facebook alone is not the boogieman. There's plenty of others to blame for getting people fired up. Thank some congressional members, other politicals and even Joe himself at times.
At this time it appears Twitter and Facebook are starting to suppress this by suspending numerous accounts or putting them in lockdown for a period of time till they meet guidelines. Maybe some of these other major media companies ought to try suspending some of their own for the crap they're putting out. Much of the very stuff ending up being posted on social media.
Seems to me some of this complaining is because the traditional big money players are now losing a bunch of ad revenue after these other players came along. It also seems to me if places like Twitter and Facebook wish to benefit themselves they should disallow all political commentary completely. There are plenty of other positive things going on in each.
Granted Mark Zuckerberg, who owns 29.3% of Facebook (including Instagram) has greater control then any other single person over at 'Comcast'. This still doesn't mean he exerts near the influence 'Comcast' has over what people see and hear. Facebook's influence comes from the people who use it. Therein lies the problem. Who gets to control what people are exposed to?
I don't think the problem lies solely at the feet of Facebook as Joe would have you believe. According to Wikipedia Fox Corperation, is owned by the Murdoch family via a family trust with 39% interest.. Another behemoth able to influence people. They along with dozens of other social media sites and media companies who also had a hand in stirring the pot.
What I'm trying to say here is Facebook alone is not the boogieman. There's plenty of others to blame for getting people fired up. Thank some congressional members, other politicals and even Joe himself at times.
At this time it appears Twitter and Facebook are starting to suppress this by suspending numerous accounts or putting them in lockdown for a period of time till they meet guidelines. Maybe some of these other major media companies ought to try suspending some of their own for the crap they're putting out. Much of the very stuff ending up being posted on social media.
Seems to me some of this complaining is because the traditional big money players are now losing a bunch of ad revenue after these other players came along. It also seems to me if places like Twitter and Facebook wish to benefit themselves they should disallow all political commentary completely. There are plenty of other positive things going on in each.
Too bad things seemed to have gotten out of hand. As I see it the greater fault are the American people themselves rather then the design for which these services were intended to be used for. People have abused the privilege. These are the ones that should be punished by eliminating them from using these platforms. How we go about that is the challenge.
No ones suppressing peoples speech by kicking them off. They simply need to exercise their free speech somewhere else. The first amendment applies to government allowing the expression of free speech. No where does it say companies are forced to put up with it.
No ones suppressing peoples speech by kicking them off. They simply need to exercise their free speech somewhere else. The first amendment applies to government allowing the expression of free speech. No where does it say companies are forced to put up with it.
Don't like it go somewhere it will be more appreciated. Maybe like middle of the desert, a lake or the woods somewhere.
No comments:
Post a Comment
All comments are under moderation. Meaning pending approval. If comments are disrespectful or do not address this specific topic they will not be published