Hacker News Reader

Comment by elgabogringo | Hacker News Reader

I'd like to ask Jack why he discriminates against conservatives and libertarians. He kicked popular libertarian Milo Y off of twitter for telling a movie star to quit complaining, but let's left-wing journalists promote violence and let's them stay on. One example below.

Personally, I had it with the main stream media. If Twitter & FB are just going to retread the same messages and support the same side, then I'll actively root for them to fail.

One recent/stark example of left wing journalists promoting violence:

On the night of the protests, Emmett Rensin, a deputy editor at Vox, tweeted, "Advice: If Trump comes to your town, start a riot."

Rensin was temporarily suspended from his position for the tweet. But this did not stop him from engaging in a two-hour rant on Twitter the following day, attempting to further justify physical attacks against Trump supporters.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/06/regressive_media...

View on HN

>> "He kicked popular libertarian Milo Y"

I've only come to know of that guy since he was banned. I watched a few things he was in on YouTube. He's a proud, self-confessed troll. I'm surprised he wasn't banned sooner. Also, how are his political views related to the ban? I haven't seen anyway in which they are.

Milo is a minor media celebrity, but he's also a worthy intellectual in the political arena. He spends a lot of time sparring with ideologies he identifies as dangerous, and he succeeds in being a voice that people want to hear. He's smart, talks about politics and does it in an entertaining way. He's very good at drawing the line where you'll agree, disagree or chalk it off to trolling .

He's a valuable voice that is already missed on twitter and he's likely to be part of a movement towards a competing platform that will steal a lot of eyes from twitter. Those at Twitter who care about its financial future need to realize that Jack partisan activism and deceit is becoming a liability. Unlike a Steve Jobs, Jack doesn't really bring much excitement to the platform.

He is a gay conservative men's rights activist. He has a good time and is hilarious, but his primary purpose is certainly not trolling.

What do you think he did that deserved a ban?

Here is a 3 hour talk with Milo in which he brilliantly discusses and debate a huge range of issues: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGL5eRw7rXU

This is not someone who deserves to be censored by Jack Dorsey.

After he was banned I watched several hours of his interviews with, I think, Ruben Report. The only important takeaway relating to the Twitter ban I got was that he enjoys and actively pursues riling people up in an attempt to make his point. I will admit I even agreed with him on a few things (certainly not everything) but that doesn't matter. He was fostering a toxic atmosphere on Twitter and if the loss of a mainstream celebrity would have a bigger effect on their user numbers than the loss of him they made the right decision.

Twitter and Facebook are businesses. If you don't like how they operate, take your business somewhere else. Companies don't care if you complain, they care about there bottom line. So if you want them to change, do it in a way the free market understands.

I do take my business elsewhere... and I'm actively hoping for them to fail. If there's anything I can do to actively participate in them failing then I'll do that too.

So they're businesses in tailoring opinions?

Must be in the mission statement I missed.

All businesses end up tailoring opinions. Apple censors pornography from its app stores. Certain bakeries and florists refuse to serve gay marriages. None of this is necessary right, nor even legal, but it's a consequence of the fact that while businesses may be people, but people are not businesses, they will have biases that cause them to discriminate, even when it does not make economic sense.

Not just conservatives and libertarians. I talked to a bunch of protesters/bernie supporters in philly who said they don't trust the mainstream media or twitter after the dnc leaks was censored by so many media outlets. I think there is a huge opportunity for a non establishment media on both the right and left.

> I think there is a huge opportunity for a non establishment media on both the right and left.

There's a huge non-"mainstream media" on both the right and left already (the term "mainstream media", at least its use as a pejorative, was popularized by the large institutional right-wing media, there's also a substantial non-traditional left-wing media [which is where most of the stories that generate anger on the left with the traditional "mainstream media" on the left are transmitted].)

The anger isn't a sign of an open opportunity for non-traditional media on the left and right, its the product of the success of existing non-traditional media in transmitting ideas within the left and right.

That makes sense. It seems like when people I talked with were expressing dislike of the "mainstream media",but they meant establishment controlled media.

A lot of the people I talked to expressed disgust with vox, vice, slate, and salon as becoming establishment not just the washington post.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com