Just my opinion. I think regulation is the wrong way to go. The problem is that these corporations want to decide what can and can't be said on their platforms. Normally, I wouldn't have a problem with that. But, the fact is that they are turning on the users that made them what they are. Whether you like Alex Jones or not, he does have a huge group of followers and Facebook, Google and iTunes happily took the money that he generated for them while they were growing. But, times have changed and the monetary hit they take for kicking him off is not even noticeable now. So, they can afford to do it. So, in the end analysis, it's all about their ability to control the information. Who else likes to control things? Just about any government on the face of the Earth. Do you really want to risk driving two entities with common goals into the arms of one another? While I don't think these companies would want to get into bed with the current US administration, what about the one that comes next? The one after that? When the goals of corporations and government align perfectly, it is the people that will suffer the consequences and they will lose a little more freedom. No. I think we'll have to fight this one, ourselves. This isn't about politics. It's about freedom for everyone... even those with whom we vehemently disagree.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
mostly agree...but regulations don't make corporations collude with government they make companies follow established rules...
you like clean water...do you think EPA has any role to play in that ?
I agree that we are a nation of laws and that includes regulations to a lesser extent. To argue that no regulation is necessary is to ignore the obvious... that not everyone has the best interests of everyone else at heart. In the particular example that you cite, some corporations (which are really just a collection of regular people) thought that the "little bit" of waste they put into our rivers and streams wouldn't affect the rest of us. Then, there were others that didn't know the "little bit" of waste they put into our rivers and streams would affect the rest of us. Finally, there were those that just didn't care if what they put into our waters affected the rest of us. Over time, all of these "little bits" added up to make our water undrinkable. Regulation was necessary to stop those that would abide by the law and punish those that wouldn't. It all comes down to the basic fact that no one can exercise their rights at the expense of another. If what you do has a measurably detrimental effect on me, then you have ceased to be my equal and have taken a role of superiority. The role of our government is to insure the fair and equal treatment of all, so in a perfect world, government would be right to stop you from hurting me. But, we don't live in a world where government is always in the right. Like it or not, corporate interests hold sway because they also hold large wallets. I don't think anyone would deny that. As I think I said before, it's really not a problem until the goals of corporations and government unite in a fashion that is detrimental to the people they are supposed to protect. Government is not inherently evil and neither are corporations. But, they have the capability to become evil when they don't have the best interests of the governed at heart. My point in the post above is that some leaders in our government have tried, time and again to find various ways to control the internet through regulations. Now, a few really big corporations are trying to do the same thing, but for their own purposes. I'd much rather that we handle this problem, rather than let them find a "solution" together. I hope this clears up my opinion a little more.