AOL Owned Publisher Argues Ads Opposing Open Borders Should be Banned

An AOL owned publisher, TechCrunch, recently released an article which showed outrage against Facebook and Google for allowing an advocacy group to advertise content that opposed open borders.

The piece is fascinating because it shows how incredibly delusional and disrespectful to free speech the left has become.
Because in their liberal elite world, the idea of resisting open borders and endless islamic refugees is simply unacceptable, they admonish technology platforms to even allowing the idea to exist when paid for in the form of legitimate advertisements.
What they don’t realize is if Facebook and Google were NOT to allow advertisements of conservative ideas, this would no doubt spur a major backlash and tens of millions of users would surely boycott, causing these tech giants to crumble. The NFL has already seen this effect in action.
The idea that tech platforms that are supposed to support free speech would act instead as pure Democratic party propaganda, banning others that don’t agree, is sadly alive and well as a sick dream of the left.
From TechCruch
In a textbook illustration of the conflict of interest between Facebook and Google’s ostensible dedication to free speech and their ostensible espousal of progressive values, the internet giants reportedly took millions in advertising money from a major anti-immigration group at the same time as both were engaged in pro-immigration advocacy.
Bloomberg reports that both companies worked with conservative nonprofit Secure America Now, which spent millions on ads on the platforms during the 2016 election. SAN’s ads, as far as they related to immigration and refugees, were execrable scaremongering, invoking the phantom threat of Sharia law being applied worldwide — the Mona Lisa wearing a niqab, for instance.
Mark Zuckerberg wrote in a blog post:
We need to keep this country safe, but we should do that by focusing on people who actually pose a threat… We should also keep our doors open to refugees and those who need help. That’s who we are.
And Sundar Pichai in an internal memo:
We’re concerned about the impact of this order and any proposals that could impose restrictions on Googlers and their families, or that create barriers to bringing great talent to the U.S….We’ve always made our view on immigration issues known publicly and will continue to do so.
Am I the only one for whom these sentiments ring hollow considering that both companies had so recently been dancing for coins from a group whose sole purpose was to scare voters into choosing the candidate with the strong anti-immigration stance?
I understand that it is a very difficult balance, to be a platform on which free speech is valued, but to have to run a business as well. You can’t turn your nose up at something that turns your stomach — not if the price is right. So the scammy apps, miracle diet pills, and conspiracy theories all get their ad spots just like Target and Newegg.
But to take millions from a group one day, and then turn around the next to say you are deeply and fundamentally opposed to that group’s values — I’d like to say I don’t expect that kind of cynical hypocrisy, but that would be a lie. Why expect any better?
Share on Google Plus

0 comentarios:

Publicar un comentario