╌>

Parler Is Not The First Victim Of Big Tech; Remember Prager U?

  
Via:  XXJefferson51  •  5 years ago  •  138 comments

By:   OneNewsNow.com Staff

Parler Is Not The First Victim Of Big Tech; Remember Prager U?
One group that is no stranger to left-wing Big Tech and its anti-conservative punishment is Prager University, the conservative-leaning website. Founded by columnist Dennis Prager, the website competes against left-wing professors to educate young generations about politics, culture, and religion. The biggest draw of Prager U is its five-minute mini-presentations, also aimed at young adults, that feature names such as Ben Shapiro, Dave Rubin, and Ayaan Hirsi Ali with topics such as...

Leave a comment to auto-join group We the People

We the People

The biased bigots that own and operate big tech social media are a monopoly engaged in racketeering and RICO collusion against conservative social media.  They are criminals operating criminal enterprises that hopefully the new internet will drive to complete and total financial bankruptcy to match their moral bankruptcy.   


S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



political_censorship.jpg




The small but growing social media site Parler has witnessed a mafia-like ambush after Apple, Amazon, and Google teamed up to take it down, and now the public is debating if “hate speech” led to its punishment or the public witnessed a coordinated hit against a conservative hangout.


Big Tech giant Twitter, meanwhile, has permanently banned President Trump, leaving his 88 million-plus followers looking for another way to stay in touch with the President and his famous — and often controversial —posts. Those posts ironically drove lots of traffic to the social media giant which  watched $5 billion in market value disappear overnight  after it gave the outgoing commander in chief the heave-ho.

Responding to the actions of Big Tech, Parler CEO John Matze says the social media site was thoroughly and effectively canceled in a coordinated effort.

“It’s not just these three companies,” he told Fox News, the news network that is familiar with being loathed by the Left that wants it gone. “Every vendor, from text message services to email providers to our lawyers, all ditched us, too, on the same day.”

Amazon claimed Parler and its invitation to “speak freely and express yourself openly” created an online environment of threats and violent content that violated Amazon’s terms of service when those posts were not removed and punished. Google made the same claim, and the Big Tech titans are linking Parler’s online environment with last week’s mob attack on the U.S. Capitol building.

It might also be a coincidence that conservatives have been flocking to Parler after Election Day, especially after they are punished by Twitter’s censors, and both the Right and the Left recognize Parler has become the new social media favorite for conservatives.

Prager U: We warned you

One group that is no stranger to left-wing Big Tech and its anti-conservative punishment is  Prager University , the conservative-leaning website. Founded by columnist Dennis Prager, the website competes against left-wing professors to educate young generations about politics, culture, and religion.

The biggest draw of Prager U is its  five-minute mini-presentations,  also aimed at young adults, that feature names such as Ben Shapiro, Dave Rubin, and Ayaan Hirsi Ali with topics such as feminism’s effect on the culture, socialism’s violent history, and the future of Islam.

Craig Strazzeri, chief marketing officer for Prager University, told the “Washington Watch” program that Prager U has fought Big Tech since 2016, when its videos were restricted and censored over their displeasing content.

Almost a year ago, Prager U  lost its federal lawsuit  against Google and You Tube in a 3-0 appeals court decision. Responding to Prager U’s complaint that YouTube promotes itself as a free speech platform where “everyone deserves a voice,” one judge said that is not false advertising but merely the company’s opinion about itself.

According to Strazzeri, conservatives did not take the free speech issue seriously as Prager U waged war against the powerful Big Tech titans.

“And here we are in 2021,” he concluded. “And we’ve reached kind of this peak of now people are starting to realize where this is all going. And it’s gone from troubling to downright scary, and people’s speech is no longer free as it’s always been in America.”

Dan Gainor of  MRC Tech Watch  tells One News Now the Saturday Night Massacre of Parler reminds him of the “Cultural Revolution” in China.

“They ran around and destroyed statues – sound familiar? – changed names of things, erased history,” he recalls, “because they didn’t like the history.”

Before it was over, he adds, the “pesky people” who got in the way were also erased from the “Cultural Revolution” that was taking place.

Parler fighting back

Claiming an antitrust violation and breach of contract, Parler is now suing Amazon for suspending its app.

Reacting to the Parler’s punishment and now the lawsuit, U.S. Rep. Devin Nunes (R-California) told Fox Business the coordinated hit on Parler deserves to be investigated for anti-trust violations and possibly a RICO statute.

“There should be a racketeering investigation on all the people that coordinated this attack,” he said, “on not only a company, but on all of those like us.”

Nunes said he has three million followers on Parler and there is no longer a way to communicate with them.

—-

Copyright OneNewsNow.com . Reprinted with permission.











Tags

jrGroupDiscuss - desc
[]
 
Kavika
Professor Expert
2  Kavika     5 years ago

Prager U, is that a subsidiary of Trump University?

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
2.1  devangelical  replied to  Kavika @2    5 years ago

same mailing list.

 
 
 
Gordy327
Professor Participates
2.1.1  Gordy327  replied to  devangelical @2.1    5 years ago

Same nonsense too.

 
 
 
evilone
Professor Guide
3  evilone    5 years ago
...Prager University, the conservative-leaning website.

PU was not leaning anything. It was a full out propaganda swilling hate machine. The impotent tears of hate mongers fuel my dreams.

 
 
 
Trotsky's Spectre
Freshman Silent
4  Trotsky's Spectre    5 years ago

 When I think of education, five minute mini-presentations don't come to mind.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Guide
4.1  sandy-2021492  replied to  Trotsky's Spectre @4    5 years ago

It's all some folks can handle.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Participates
4.1.2  Split Personality  replied to  XXJefferson51 @4.1.1    5 years ago

Wrong, minnow.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Participates
4.1.5  Split Personality  replied to  XXJefferson51 @4.1.3    5 years ago

keep dreaming, grasshopper, lol

 
 
 
Gsquared
Professor Expert
4.1.7  Gsquared  replied to  XXJefferson51 @4.1.6    5 years ago

How many names have you called yourself over the last few months?   

"Proud deplorable"

"Chump"

Just to mention a couple.   There are a whole lot more.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Participates
5  Split Personality    5 years ago
“The content at issue ... encourages rape, murder and torture,” Doran said. The lawyer filed examples of inflammatory, disturbing Parler posts in court, which she called “the tip of the iceberg.”

The posts showed Parler users discussing mass murder of liberals, extreme homophobia and transphobia, racism, and attacks on Amazon itself.

“On January 20 we need to start systematically assassinating #liberal leaders, liberal activists, #blm leaders and supporters, members of the #nba #nfl #mlb #nhl #mainstreammedia anchors and correspondents and #antifa. I already have news worthy events planned,” read one bloodthirsty post.

“I really don’t look forward to having to kill someone, but it is necessary for the future of our people,” read another in response to a discussion about the start of a civil war.

Another user posted, “The only good democrat is a dead one.”

The online invective was eerily reminiscent of the assaults on Capitol police officers by pro-Trump supporters during last week’s siege.

“Cops are modern day redcoats. These ‘officers’ will strip you of your rights so be prepared to fight if necessary,” a post read.

Amazon pulled the plug on Parler four days after the riot, saying the company was unable to moderate its inflammatory content.

“The events of January 6 changed the way we think about the world,” Doran said.

Parler says Amazon’s move has destroyed its business and is politically motivated. At the time of the suspension, the network had 15 million users and was adding 1 million new users a day. Trump himself was reportedly considering opening an account.

“The site is supported by advertisers. They’re gone. They have no revenue coming in,” Parler attorney David Groesbeck said, adding Amazon shouldn’t be allowed to “take 15 million voices and turn them off.”

Judge Barbara Rothstein will rule on Parler’s demand that Amazon restore services.

Amazon says the suit is "Meritless", experts agree.

Parler's Antitrust Lawsuit Over Amazon Deplatforming Has Tough Road Ahead

...

Does Parler's claim have any merit? Cindy Cohn, executive director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation and an attorney who specializes in internet law, tells Reason that for Parler's antitrust claim to hold up, it must be established that Amazon and Twitter have a shared purpose in driving Parler out of business.

"I think it is a high bar," Cohn says. "I don't see that the facts support it."

"The claims are really weak, legally and factually," she says. Even if it were to be proven that Parler was explicitly targeted for political reasons and that Amazon's policies were not implemented fairly, Parler would still fail to furnish the evidence required to prove an antitrust violation.

"A business gets to decide who it does business with," Cohn says. "Nothing in this complaint demonstrates collusion between Twitter and Amazon."

In an interview with the Washington Examiner , University of Pennsylvania law professor and antitrust expert Herbert Hovenkamp said that Parler's claims of political discrimination may actually work against them. "If its intent is to exclude views because they threaten violence or lead to distrust of government but not merely to eliminate a competitor, then the exclusion is probably not covered by antitrust law.

 
 

Who is online

evilone


78 visitors