Parler is bringing together mainstream conservatives, anti-Semites and white supremacists as the social media platform attracts millions of Trump supporters
“Parler…has already achieved a reputation and level of engagement that has overtaken other alternative platforms. But along with its success comes the reality that extremist movements like QAnon and the Boogalooers have thrived in the platform’s unregulated chaos.” - The Conversation
- 4 views
Here’s an example where Dennis Prager’s work was apparently censored by Facebook. Like him, hate him, or (like me) be somewhat ambivalent about his work, the man is pretty responsible and mainstream. Now there could be plausible deniability here—perhaps those on the far left complain more and the squeaky wheel gets the grease and all—but there are apparently a lot of examples of things that don’t come from Trump’s proverbial manure generator (his cell phone).
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
but a website allowing people to make their avatar be a fully nude (top and bottom) woman is insane. That isn’t speech.
[Mark_Smith]but a website allowing people to make their avatar be a fully nude (top and bottom) woman is insane. That isn’t speech.
Mark, the SCOTUS has ruled that it is.
Scotus said websites can’t restrict naked pictures on their sites?
[Mark_Smith]Scotus said websites can’t restrict naked pictures on their sites?
Of course not. But nudity / sexually graphic depictions are protected speech.
[Mark_Smith]Scotus said websites can’t restrict naked pictures on their sites?
Binds government, not necessarily private companies. So government can’t totally ban nude pictures in their sites, but (for example) Instagram and Facebook can and do.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
not government. The minute Parler allows people to have nude avatars they go from being a free speech platform to a porn site. That was my point, not a discussion about the fine points of SCOTUS decisions… but you knew that.
Mark,
You can’t proclaim to be a defender and promoter of free speech on one hand then sensor speech you find objectionable on the other. Porn (assuming it’s not child porn or ruled obscenity) is protected speech. By allowing nudity, Parler is just being consistent with its claim of free speech.
Free speech is a double-edged sword.
As nice as it would be to live in a world without porn, I’ve come to realize that Christians must learn to guard their own eyes, and not demand that others do it for them. If we demand that others censor nudity because it offends us, what prohibits others from censoring viewpoints that they do not agree with? We know where that takes us, as we are seeing numerous examples in politics and culture today. It’s the cancel culture.
I commend Mark for self censoring nudity on Parler. That’s his privilege, and arguably, his Christian duty. It is surely the correct choice in regard to his personal sanctification and unimpeded fellowship with Christ. Expecting Parler to do it for him, as helpful as that would be, only opens the door for other forms of censorship. Unless Parler claims to be a Christian forum, they will have to allow objectionable material if they expect to truly be a free speech platform. Thanks for the heads up. I now know that I will not be opening a Parler account.
G. N. Barkman
Saying you are a free speech forum and then allowing nude pictures turns you from the potential of having a massive, broad spectrum reach, to one having a much smaller audience. Its stupid for business.
You can be a free speech site and limit porn…
At a Christian forum I’d be told I am being unreasonable for asking the simple service of website administrators preventing posters from showing full blown female and male sexual pictures as avatars…
It isn’t free speech. Its your audience. How many people want to talk about politics, for example, with pictures of naked women and other things flashing around? Its silly.
If Parler decides it’s better for business to prohibit nude pictures, they have the right, and are probably making a wise decision. But it may be difficult for them to claim they are the free speech alternative to Twitter, Facebook, etc., if they practice censorship. If they want my involvement, they will need to prohibit nudity. Like Mark, I value my sanctification more than the desire to use Parler. (Who has enough time to visit multiple sites anyway?)
G. N. Barkman
As I stated above, I haven’t yet run into even one instance of people with nudes as avatars, or other sources of such images, though as I said, I mostly read the feed and not the comments, and none of the commenters I’ve followed (most of which are posts that point to news articles, which I do click on) have those avatars either. I’m not sure how you ran into that immediately, Mark, but I can say after about 3 weeks of usage, it’s not ubiquitous.
Dave Barnhart
[dcbii]As I stated above, I haven’t yet run into even one instance of people with nudes as avatars, or other sources of such images, though as I said, I mostly read the feed and not the comments, and none of the commenters I’ve followed (most of which are posts that point to news articles, which I do click on) have those avatars either. I’m not sure how you ran into that immediately, Mark, but I can say after about 3 weeks of usage, it’s not ubiquitous.
Go to Mark Levin’s page and look at recent posts and replies. I’d do a screen capture but I think Aaron wouldn’t like it. I suspect he is famous enough to attract reprobates looking for clicks.
[Mark_Smith]Go to Mark Levin’s page and look at recent posts and replies. I’d do a screen capture but I think Aaron wouldn’t like it. I suspect he is famous enough to attract reprobates looking for clicks.
OK, that explains it. I guess I’ll continue staying away from most comments (replies) to the posts.
Dave Barnhart
Discussion