Jump to content

Politics... World events


Gorth

Recommended Posts

On 2/17/2021 at 7:15 PM, Hiro Protagonist said:

Facebook just cancelled Australia globally with any and ALL news from Australia regardless of what that 'news' may be. Whether it be blogs, government agencies - EVERYTHING.

LMAO.

 

How long until they announce Australia doesn't exist?

Is Zuckerberg secretly a flat Earther?

sign.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting. I remember having this exact discussion here not long ago and being called crazy for suggesting such ridiculous things as Facebook blocking news or governments essential services. Also the usual "it's a private company they can do whatever they want" and "you cannot force them to publish something they don't want" lines. 

166215__front.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, Facebook is still private company and US based company which allows them to decide what to publish, which includes foreign governments and news organizations, without fearing closure of their business or retribution from their government.

US government cannot force them to publish anything because of US constitution, but US constitution of course don't protect them outside of US if they want to do business in countries that aren't US (I mention this because previous discussion about this was about social media companies blocking US politicians and organizations). As in this case Facebook decided not to publish any of Australian news sites because of change in Australian law which they welt were such that they didn't want to even try to comply with it and decided draconian measure of blocking all the content which the new law impacts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Elerond said:

Yeah, Facebook is still private company and US based company which allows them to decide what to publish, which includes foreign governments and news organizations, without fearing closure of their business or retribution from their government.

US government cannot force them to publish anything because of US constitution, but US constitution of course don't protect them outside of US if they want to do business in countries that aren't US (I mention this because previous discussion about this was about social media companies blocking US politicians and organizations). As in this case Facebook decided not to publish any of Australian news sites because of change in Australian law which they welt were such that they didn't want to even try to comply with it and decided draconian measure of blocking all the content which the new law impacts. 

This just will make other countries hardline more on US tech. India is doing it with Twitter, EU is very slow, but eventually they will hammer on US tech, and they lose nothing if FB would be removed, as they do not see much money from SM making money of EU users. Sure, some lifestyle of 'influencers' amd services around them will have to change, but that's not much of a loss either. 

Edited by Darkpriest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Darkpriest said:

This just will make other countries hardline more on US tech. India is doing it with Twitter, EU is very slow, but eventually they will hammer on US tech, and they lose nothing if FB would be removed, as they do not see much money from SM making money of EU users. Sure, some lifestyle of 'influencers' amd services around them will have to change, but that's not much of a loss either. 

The legislation that caused this was hardline legislation by Australia, which forces US tech companies to pay Australian news companies for their content that appears in their sites. Facebook point in blocking Australian news sites is that it does not want to pay them for content that they publish in its service for free 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Elerond said:

The legislation that caused this was hardline legislation by Australia, which forces US tech companies to pay Australian news companies for their content that appears in their sites. Facebook point in blocking Australian news sites is that it does not want to pay them for content that they publish in its service for free 

Theu do not publish for free, they use the traffic those generate and make money off that. There are no "free" services. You are paying them with your data usage. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Darkpriest said:

Theu do not publish for free, they use the traffic those generate and make money off that. There are no "free" services. You are paying them with your data usage. 

Australian News services don't pay for Facebook for publishing their content there, as Facebook makes its money from ad revenue and selling visibility for the posts. Facebook point for blocking Australian news companies from posting their content in Facebook is that it does not want to pay for them for publishing content in Facebook.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wasn't just the media that Facebook blocked. FB blocked Government websites, various State Government Health Departments (during a pandemic), the Bureau of Meteorology, Local businesses including law firms, Support pages for various people like victims of domestic abuse and so on. Facebook went mental and FB had to re-instate some of these pages.

Facebook reinstating health and safety pages but government says damage to reputation has been done.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-02-18/facebook-credibility-brought-into-question-health-emergency-news/13166318

Their decision to block Australians' access to government sites — be they about support through the pandemic, mental health, emergency services, the Bureau of Meteorology — was completely unrelated to the media code, which is yet to pass through the Senate

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Elerond said:

Australian News services don't pay for Facebook for publishing their content there, as Facebook makes its money from ad revenue and selling visibility for the posts. Facebook point for blocking Australian news companies from posting their content in Facebook is that it does not want to pay for them for publishing content in Facebook.

Fair enough, however this also means less traffic and less ad revenue for FB. I guess they could choke it up. However, governments like money, and you can be sure, that they will now move into space, where FB will have to compromise its core business practice. They will target the traffic generated by Australian taxpayers amd demand portion of that ad revenue and revenue from selling behavioral profiling information be paid as a tax. (and you can be sure, that they will drop on the platform the resposnsibility to ensure identity of its user, if that user is a local taxpayer or not) 

 

And as it was also said, not only that content was blocked. 

Edited by Darkpriest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Darkpriest said:

Fair enough, however this also means less traffic and less ad revenue for FB. I guess they could choke it up. However, governments like money, and you can be sure, that they will now move into space, where FB will have to compromise its core business practice. They will target the traffic generated by Australian taxpayers amd demand portion of that ad revenue and revenue from selling behavioral profiling information be paid as a tax. 

 

And as it was also said, not only that content was blocked. 

Yeah, although Facebook estimate was "News makes up less than 4% of the content people see in their News Feed." , so they don't see news as something that brings them lots of revenue

EDIT: I like that they call it 'News Feed' when 96% content in it is not news

Edited by Elerond
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Elerond said:

Yeah, Facebook is still private company and US based company which allows them to decide what to publish, which includes foreign governments and news organizations, without fearing closure of their business or retribution from their government.

One interesting twist to the whole thing is, the company that Facebook refuses to pay is Murdoch's Newscorp. The same people who runs Fox News. I couldn't care less about Facebook, they could crash and burn for all I care, no need for it. But I like Murdoch even less. I guess I understand how Americans felt when it was a choice between Clinton and Trump. In this case, the world would be better off without either 😂

  • Like 1

“He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice.” - Albert Einstein

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Skarpen said:

Interesting. I remember having this exact discussion here not long ago and being called crazy for suggesting such ridiculous things as Facebook blocking news or governments essential services. Also the usual "it's a private company they can do whatever they want" and "you cannot force them to publish something they don't want" lines. 

Yeah, nobody is defending Facebook for this stuff, just pointing out they are free to do it. It would be even worse to allow the government to force a private company into publishing something they don't want, but I suppose they is a lot of wiggle room there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-australia-media-facebook-idUSKBN2AK01S

 

Austarlia will most likely push FB to yield and accept some form of payment, as in the background there is already a political union building, which consists of Australia, Canada, France, Germany, and it also is fitting the tune played by India. 

 

I believe Russia works on a law or is already proceeding one, which will allow them to fine Social Media tech, if they will censor any Russian citizen, who did not break a Russian law. 

Some other more nationalistic leaning countries, are also looking in that direction. 

Edited by Darkpriest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/19/2021 at 9:47 AM, Hurlshot said:

Yeah, nobody is defending Facebook for this stuff, just pointing out they are free to do it. It would be even worse to allow the government to force a private company into publishing something they don't want, but I suppose they is a lot of wiggle room there. 

Oh come, even the most die hard neoliberals have to admit at some point that major social media outlets are working hand and hand with the U.S. Nomenklatura.

“If we are to have another contest in the near future of our national existence, I predict that the dividing line will not be Mason and Dixon's but between patriotism and intelligence on the one side, and superstition, ambition and ignorance on the other.” 

-Ulysses S. Grant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Breaking news: the Capitol riots were influenced by Kurdish revolutionaries, according to world renowned geopolitical analyst Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

r14th408rui61.png

Normally I'd hesitate to post anything Memri related since it's an Israeli psy-op that deliberately mistranslates a lot of the time to make people look more stupid or obnoxious than they are, but in this case it's what he actually said. The idea of MAGA types being influenced by massively left wing anarcho-collectivist Kurds is an interesting take, to say the least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good old Erdolf (if you don't like Erdolf you can susbstitute Bosporussian :p). So the MAGA raid on the Capitol was really a ANTIFA false flag operation with overseas Kurdish support to... to what end  then? Keeping the guy in office that let him attack the Kurds in the first place? Man... so many layers. 

No mind to think. No will to break. No voice to cry suffering.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Zoraptor said:

Normally I'd hesitate to post anything Memri related since it's an Israeli psy-op that deliberately mistranslates a lot of the time to make people look more stupid or obnoxious than they are, but in this case it's what he actually said. The idea of MAGA types being influenced by massively left wing anarcho-collectivist Kurds is an interesting take, to say the least.

I'm surprised he didn't pin it on whatshisname the Cleric he claims was behind the "military coup attempt" (and which resides in the US)  he used as excuse to purge all opposition.

Edit: It's still more creditable than the ghost of Chavez being behind it and financing it of course.

“He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice.” - Albert Einstein

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everything from earthquakes to covid to winter storms to Erdogan personally claiming to have ordered that Russian jet to be shot down is obviously Fetullah Gulen's fault though, he doesn't need to actually blame him specifically any more. Stub your toe? Gulen. Weevils in your flour? Gulen. Rain on your wedding day? Gulen. Green lights when you're already late? Gulen.

OTOH if Trump had somehow managed to wangle his way back to the presidency Erdogan would probably be claiming MAGA Shaman as Turkish due to Tengrism- while simultaneously courting the domestic Islamic vote.

  • Hmmm 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Zoraptor said:

Everything from earthquakes to covid to winter storms to Erdogan personally claiming to have ordered that Russian jet to be shot down is obviously Fetullah Gulen's fault though, he doesn't need to actually blame him specifically any more. Stub your toe? Gulen. Weevils in your flour? Gulen. Rain on your wedding day? Gulen. Green lights when you're already late? Gulen.

OTOH if Trump had somehow managed to wangle his way back to the presidency Erdogan would probably be claiming MAGA Shaman as Turkish due to Tengrism- while simultaneously courting the domestic Islamic vote.

But the initial Gulen coup was real, it was mishandled and doomed to fail but it was real

Erdogan took advantage of that coup in  numerous ways that included arresting any journalists he didnt like as part of the " lets free Turkey from the evil Gulenists " 

And as you mentioned he now blames many things on Gulen and some of them have nothing to do with Gulen and his supporters

But we must never forget the important role Turkey plays in the region, like Saudi Arabia. So we mustnt be too harsh on Erdogan because his country is important for regional prosperity and stability 

"Abashed the devil stood and felt how awful goodness is and saw Virtue in her shape how lovely: and pined his loss”

John Milton 

"We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.” -  George Bernard Shaw

"What counts in life is not the mere fact that we have lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of others that will determine the significance of the life we lead" - Nelson Mandela

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/22/2021 at 6:01 PM, BruceVC said:

But we must never forget the important role Turkey plays in the region, like Saudi Arabia. So we mustnt be too harsh on Erdogan because his country is important for regional prosperity and stability 

You just mentioned two countries where the world would be a lot better off if their governments were replaced wholesale.

  • Like 2
  • Hmmm 1

“He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice.” - Albert Einstein

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Gorth said:

You just mentioned two countries where the world would a lot better off if their governments were replaced wholesale.

The same thing was said about Libia, Syria, Iraq and Iran governments. What came after is not better than previous regimes. Surprisingly I do understand and share Bruce concerns about destabilizing SA and Turkey without knowing what would come next. 

  • Like 1

166215__front.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Skarpen said:

The same thing was said about Libia, Syria, Iraq and Iran governments. What came after is not better than previous regimes. Surprisingly I do understand and share Bruce concerns about destabilizing SA and Turkey without knowing what would come next. 

Entirely an opinion thing on my behalf, but I believe the mess in 2 of the 3 countries you mentioned was/is because the planning never included a replacement, only a removal. And then some naive finger crossing and hoping for the best. Well, in Syria it didn't quite work out because Putin had other ideas, probably for a number of his own reasons (flexing international muscles, exerting geopolitical influence, keeping the naval base in Syria, avoiding a resurgence of muslim terrorist in eh Caucasus, testing military operational abilities etc.).

 

Edit: There seems to be a connection (not sure about cause and effect, could be the other way around) that countries led by "strongmen" and populists that keep beating the nationalist/religious drum end up either becoming weak or never grow strong internally so they can handle power vacuums. In short, populists and nationalists are the symptom of a weak or weakening society.

  • Like 1

“He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice.” - Albert Einstein

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gorth said:

Entirely an opinion thing on my behalf, but I believe the mess in 2 of the 3 countries you mentioned was/is because the planning never included a replacement, only a removal. And then some naive finger crossing and hoping for the best. Well, in Syria it didn't quite work out because Putin had other ideas, probably for a number of his own reasons (flexing international muscles, exerting geopolitical influence, keeping the naval base in Syria, avoiding a resurgence of muslim terrorist in eh Caucasus, testing military operational abilities etc.).

 

Edit: There seems to be a connection (not sure about cause and effect, could be the other way around) that countries led by "strongmen" and populists that keep beating the nationalist/religious drum end up either becoming weak or never grow strong internally so they can handle power vacuums. In short, populists and nationalists are the symptom of a weak or weakening society.

Yes you need to separate each country in the ME and look at the circumstances  and history of each government to understand and be objective around its success and failures

For example its unhelpful and inaccurate to keep blaming the West for the situation in Libya, Gaddafi had every opportunity to include the various Libyan tribes in the economy of Libya when this was raised by the Libyan people during the Arab Spring

He decided to go to war with  his own people and the Western airpower initiative helped prevent a massacre in the besieged town of Misrata

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Misrata

Yes the West then extended the bombing campaign but only to defeat Gaddafis airpower, anti-aircraft and military hardware...but the ground to ground fighting was done by Libyan tribes and Gaddafi was killed in the streets of Tripoli by Libyan militias. Not the West

Also and most important their was never an agreement that the West would get involved and rebuild Libya once Gaddafi was gone, many of the Libyan tribes disliked the notion of the West getting involved in running the country post-Gaddafi and the West didnt want to do this anyway. This must and should be a united effort managed through the UN 

"Abashed the devil stood and felt how awful goodness is and saw Virtue in her shape how lovely: and pined his loss”

John Milton 

"We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.” -  George Bernard Shaw

"What counts in life is not the mere fact that we have lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of others that will determine the significance of the life we lead" - Nelson Mandela

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Skarpen said:

The same thing was said about Libia, Syria, Iraq and Iran governments. What came after is not better than previous regimes. Surprisingly I do understand and share Bruce concerns about destabilizing SA and Turkey without knowing what would come next. 

Just one example of the important role Turkey plays in the region, which people sometimes forget due to Erdogans sometimes  reckless political decisions, is that Turkey helps with a very important staging area  which helps to process immigrants wanting to live in the EU. If Turkey wasnt doing this the EU would be dealing with hundreds of thousands of additional immigrants and refugees  outside of what the EU is currently trying to address 

https://www.ekathimerini.com/news/250424/eu-turkey-seeking-to-keep-lines-of-communication-open-on-migration/ 

@Skarpen trust me on this but  the last thing  we want is the people of Poland and other EU countries having to deal with thousands more refugees and immigrants expecting automatic citizenship 

"Abashed the devil stood and felt how awful goodness is and saw Virtue in her shape how lovely: and pined his loss”

John Milton 

"We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.” -  George Bernard Shaw

"What counts in life is not the mere fact that we have lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of others that will determine the significance of the life we lead" - Nelson Mandela

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Gorth said:

Edit: There seems to be a connection (not sure about cause and effect, could be the other way around) that countries led by "strongmen" and populists that keep beating the nationalist/religious drum end up either becoming weak or never grow strong internally so they can handle power vacuums. In short, populists and nationalists are the symptom of a weak or weakening society.

Succession to a strongman is always difficult if it isn't hereditary. But in terms of a country's strength Russia and China under Putin and Xi are far stronger than under their predecessors, and they're both nationalist/ religious so long as you take China's 'communism' as a belief system. Of course for Russia it was a positively subterranean bar as Yeltsin's mouldering corpse would have been better than Yeltsin was since at least he couldn't actively ruin the country when dead as he did alive...

I don't think we really need to look far beyond Goering's quote for reasons why nationalism is so popular among strongmen.

Quote

All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peace makers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.

but when it comes right down to it the strongmen in the example failed because... democracies convinced themselves that they were under threat, or knew better how to run those countries. In essence nationalism is the belief that your country is intrinsically better, and you can't get much more self righteous/ deluded about your country being better than believing your own press about being 'liberators' and the 'good guys' when in reality you've managed to completely and systematically asterisk up every country you've intervened in for the past 5? decades leaving every one worse than before you intervened.

The cause and effect is the big question. But end of the day if you're going into a country, smashing all its institutions and then saying that the reason for the ensuing anarchy is because the country is fundamentally 'weak' you're ignoring a certain step in that chain and presuming the reason for that weakness is not the fact you've gone in and smashed everything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...