censorship?

[l921428x]

http://dailycaller.com/2014/09/23/re...zed-deceptive/

is it or is he fair game?

[LAGC]

Well, you know, talk radio shock-jocks are free to speak their mind. So are the folks who disagree with their message.

As for advertisers? They are free to choose whether or not their products/services get associated with any one particular program. If the owners of those advertising companies sense revenues are stagnating or falling short because of boycotts/negative-publicity, well... you can't blame them for wanting to perform a little damage control.

Sounds like democracy at work to me.

[5.56NATO]

No tears for rinos.

[Aggressive Perfector]

I don't see any censorship. I see Rush speaking his mind, and I see some Liberals speaking theirs. Nothing wrong with that. However, their methods are more than questionable.

[l921428x]

I don't see any censorship. I see Rush speaking his mind, and I see some Liberals speaking theirs. Nothing wrong with that. However, their methods are more than questionable.

yup

[studmuffin]

Truth is open censorship is coming closer and closer every day. The US commerce department has just canceled the contract with the present internet oversight committee, composed of pure IT geeks. The plan is to hand control over to the UN. In our future, governments like North Korea and the Russian Federation can decide what internet content you can view. Welcome to Obama's hope and changed. This is the same adminstration that tried to force FCC observers into newsrooms. For once the MSM got its fur up and complained.

[Kadmos]

I don't see any censorship. I see Rush speaking his mind, and I see some Liberals speaking theirs. Nothing wrong with that. However, their methods are more than questionable.

Yep. Pretty sure Rush has called for a boycott or two in his time. His detractors have the same right.

Not a fan of Robo-tweeting, or trying to make it look like more people by using multiple accounts, that seems shady

[ltorlo64]

Yep. Pretty sure Rush has called for a boycott or two in his time. His detractors have the same right.

Not a fan of Robo-tweeting, or trying to make it look like more people by using multiple accounts, that seems shady

The difference being, as you have alluded to, he did not try to make 10 people look like several thousand or more but dishonest means. If they have to resort to this to get his message to stop, how much farther are they willing to go if this does not work?

[Kadmos]

The difference being, as you have alluded to, he did not try to make 10 people look like several thousand or more but dishonest means. If they have to resort to this to get his message to stop, how much farther are they willing to go if this does not work?

I agree for the most part. Personally I find the "hit this poll" posts to be kinda shady, so fake accounts is way beyond what I'd do. Contacting advertisers seems ok to me.

My only point of disagreement is the "how much farther are they willing to go", and while obviously it's an unknown, and it could go further, I'm not certain that this type of thing is all that outside the norm anymore, not to the point where I would be worried over anything. I get you may not have been implying that, but it was just a thought I had.

The anonymity of the internet has led to a lot of things that while not illegal, are shady. Businesses reviewing themselves on Yelp, people making a small group appear much larger, etc.

[studmuffin]

Shady or not, the internet has proved to be a valuable alternative to the blatent propaganda of the lame stream media. Attempts to block or control the internet are blatent attempts as censorship. Countries that severel control or limit the internet include china, Cuba, North Korea, many nations of the middle east. Counter argue that????

CONTROL OF THE INTERNET=CENSORSHIP THUS ENDENTH THE SERMON.

[LAGC]

Shady or not, the internet has proved to be a valuable alternative to the blatent propaganda of the lame stream media. Attempts to block or control the internet are blatent attempts as censorship. Countries that severel control or limit the internet include china, Cuba, North Korea, many nations of the middle east. Counter argue that????

CONTROL OF THE INTERNET=CENSORSHIP THUS ENDENTH THE SERMON.

No doubt, my friend. No doubt.

The problem is, just like with everything else in this once-great country, everything is becoming monetized these days. The so-called interstate "freeways" are becoming toll-ways, you can only broadcast on radio or T.V. if you have lots of money (more and more each and every year), and even the content of many once free web-sites are becoming surrounded by "paywalls" more and more, where you have to pay to subscribe to access any content. Eventually the ISPs will kill net neutrality as well, and only the big players who can afford to "pay to play" for high-speed access will have their content streamed fast to consumers, while every other non-mainstream web-site will be confined to the "slow lane" that won't even completely load more than half the time.

The (mostly) free-and-open Internet that has existed before now will likely be seen by future generations as one grand experiment that eventually failed because: TANSTAAFL.

It is what it is.

[l921428x]

Just Google. they will help ya.

[studmuffin]

No doubt, my friend. No doubt.

The problem is, just like with everything else in this once-great country, everything is becoming monetized these days. The so-called interstate "freeways" are becoming toll-ways, you can only broadcast on radio or T.V. if you have lots of money (more and more each and every year), and even the content of many once free web-sites are becoming surrounded by "paywalls" more and more, where you have to pay to subscribe to access any content. Eventually the ISPs will kill net neutrality as well, and only the big players who can afford to "pay to play" for high-speed access will have their content streamed fast to consumers, while every other non-mainstream web-site will be confined to the "slow lane" that won't even completely load more than half the time.

The (mostly) free-and-open Internet that has existed before now will likely be seen by future generations as one grand experiment that eventually failed because: TANSTAAFL.

It is what it is.

It's been monitized for years. Ever hear of online porn? It still managed to be wide open though. Now that the FCC has tried to fiddle within, the days of the old west are fading. It will just go underground.

[l921428x]

see the pop ups.