the little thing we talked to grandma about her favorite cappy oka recipes these are you chiles this is the phone company this is f.c.c. this these are t.v. waves this is whatever analogy you want over the line and they're not legally bound i mean i think they should become utilities because what i'm saying is they function as utility that's what i'm saying that we have to change that this idea for good section 230 and all this kind of but we have to realize that when 90 percent plus of a country of a group of a world uses these people to cook to cooperate it's like trying to regulate oxygen and air in the atmosphere this notion of social media platforms are going to change this and what you're doing is they're throwing everything they can to see how much resistance don't receive how much center shift people will tolerate so it has to be done right now and the 1st thing is for going to 30 which is a big deal section 230 we have to recalibrate reframed these people as utilities

imagine your phone company said your phone call dropping because it doesn't like what you're saying about whatever you want tolerated same should go for social media. jeffrey can you weigh in on the i mean i'm i'm really quite adamant that they do function as the public sphere and they do behave as utilities i mean where do we go from here because i just don't think you know that what why should mark zuckerberg or jack dorsey tell me what i can say and what i can say go ahead. so yeah there's a difference between the utility in the platform so i agree that the utility there is a utility aspect but it now doesn't lie in facebook that it lies in you know my provider wave broadbent they're the ones giving me access to the internet that's the utility facebook needs to be fit facebook needs competition facebook is dominant so requires competition so that maybe antitrust action against facebook. to is so that you've got more you know more options right more options and then regarding 230.

i think they i don't think there's any. intention to deny free speech i think the the problem is is that there has been 0 constraint on speech published on facebook twitter and so on because of a kind of an of an of a concept in the law that by that that i think new york courts were responsible for that if if an internet provider like facebook were to attempt to regulate speech then they would lose their section to 30 protections. but i think there that it's all screwed up or it really does it really does need to be changed so that so that facebook is operates more like the newspaper you know you if you want to publish up in the newspaper you have to meet certain guidelines you just can't make

up whatever you want and have it published but in a facebook today and on twitter you can do that so that's ron i think that's that's where we're having so much trouble we don't know how to categorize facebook you know is it he tell it is it a is it a is it is it more like a publisher. to me that's really what it is they are publishers so they should be operating under the same restraints that all publishers have to operate under some responsibility for their content ok well finally i think at least we can all agree they need to be responsible ok and not make decisions on a whim you know graham i mean it it's these platforms they choose winners and losers i mean i mean a good part of our life is played out i'm using these compounds directly and indirectly and if they don't like what you're doing or what you're saying they can disappear you i mean that is a major impediment to being a functioning person in society. yeah i mean it's i i totally agree it's absolutely

they should be public utilities in the problem or happening is they are just you know an elected tech billionaires are just making decisions what can be said and what can't be said and that's that's the real scary thing and they're using the events of the capitol i mean the commander in chief advocating violence and neo nazis showing up with guns and that's bad thing that that needs to be addressed but just facebook is such a great example of how they arbitrarily you know they'll they'll pull down anything that's pro palestinian but they'll leave up they've left up all right posts and stuff like that and for them to just. decide what we can and cannot say i mean i've been thwarted just as a comedian as a as an independent you tube or because they don't i'm pushing an antiwar message so that way that's offensive now and they're going to just use any anybody can be called a domestic terrorist so now is the sunrise movement going to be called domestic terrorism they have a peaceful sit in because they want to stop climate change i mean where does it end

and the fact that we know this thanks to julian assange and wiki leaks that you know google and many of these other companies have been working hand in glove with the intelligence community so it's not even about that they're monitoring everything want to control every aspect of our lives and tell us what we can and cannot do and that's that's real scary to me what's really scary i mean you brought up such a wonderful point i mean if you're pro war you're never to get. in trouble ok medibank you'll probably be reach wheat or whatever reposed it all over the place if you're anti-war no no no that's i think that that's a suggestion is behavior in speech here i mean that it's the hypocrisy is just so glaring you know one of the things is that you know when you think about you know we always talk about the terms of their services ok facebook and twitter and twitter i mean particularly 100 by story you know jack dorsey the most you know these are anti hacking. procedures but even though it wasn't happy they didn't

apply to that story whatsoever here so i mean are these terms and conditions for these of a lot of forms superseding the constitution well these are yes well he here is our problem the constitution applies to government state action let me try this one my short of why did you wait to get my friends who are on this all. to explain this and naginata and i and we had newspapers now you imagine and i happen to have the perfect ink that is used by 95 percent own his name it's my private patent and already yours every play. healers knit and everybody uses it and i'm fine one day i get a hair somewhere and i just i don't like the washington post i'm telling them you can't buy my own can or i'm exercising my right and i don't like your company so i'm going to say you might be next thing you know i can shut down the ability for people to read newspapers because i exercise this terms of my my ink you don't

go make build your own ink company or if it's this response in the cracks what we're having right now is another the republican you're having people who are advocating like on c.n.n. there's a company called newsmax it's insane it's a competitor to to fox c.n.n. we are basically having people who say that their key ball cable subscriptions cable providers should cut them because here's the best part all right right wing. neal a snake of nothing that you have to come up with a good label that people are saying. i won't say no more and that's it new ways to shut everything down don't fall under usually prescribed avenues of jurisdiction in jeopardy i mean the line brings up a really good point there because when the cover story is i would call it is that you know these other platforms promote hate speech if it's

a place for. neo nazis or bashes or something like that but if we look at the case of parlor i mean you know that was just getting rid of your competition ok because the it was obviously understood that with trump being thrown off of twitter that he would migrate to another platform with his $80000000.00 followers and essentially that was what was going to happen and then they say well you know because they're promoting hate speech with any of the any and all the hate speech you can find on parlor you can find on twitter and facebook as well so i mean this was just a market grab ok these are monopolists ok i find i'm so insulted that they would use as moral high ground because they're just greedy. well. parlor. marley wasn't. in my opinion parlor simply did not exercise any any restraint over what was published and what was said and and it was

it was becoming a gathering space for acts of violence against the government and not only against the federal government but again state and local governments so i felt like there are significant you know practical reasons for taking action against against partner the people but if i have utilized but should the people that utilize the government take action to get over your competition take action team that's a different thing you competition ok i'm not going to deny what you just said ok i'm not on parlor i didn't see it ok but it seems to me that be the people that you know turn off the valve it's your competitors it's not the government. so so the. state facebook had nothing to do with parlor i mean part parlor was removed from the google app store from the apple app store from the amazon store and from

a ws. on web services or hosting service so so facebook had nothing to do with parlor needed to twit rand but there. so also that you know the people that migrated there they had the ability to do whatever to say whatever they liked on twitter on facebook anywhere they wanted to they just happened to like their the fact that everybody who thought like them. we're all in one place this one place on partner so you know when when it came crashing down it had a it had a massive effect on that group of people. the the i don't believe that i do re that facebook doesn't want competition purely you know for 5 purely financial reasons the big short of that i don't think that i've read that they have like either a pro conservative or a pro liberal point of view you know i haven't really noticed it personally i know that i have there are groups that are very conservative then there are groups that

are very liberal you just choose which group you want to go to isn't it me a rabid later time and i want to go back to graham here but graham and i mean during during all of the events going on on the count at all and accusing the president of incitement we can discuss that separately and if they think it was a hash tag paying a pence and out of that that trended for a long time ok i mean so i mean they don't care about that ok because it suits their political agenda and the people they're acolytes in the media which apparently is so important to them to me but i'm just saying is that if you try to avoid these arbitrary standards so you won't have double standards go ahead graham before we go to break yeah it's an excellent point because you know again like if you're going to say you can't advocate violence then that like it should be done by the letter of the law and even now going back to your point about parlor yes they spoke didn't do it but google and amazon other huge tech giant graham hold that

thought we're going to go to a short break and after that short break we'll continue our discussion on what to do with big tech stay with r.t. . taste awful. coming. walk 2 blocks away from the apartment and i would get confused. meanwhile patients who had recovered from. the symptoms were different but. one of the things i like research is all over the world are trying to determine the many pains and other problems. to numbers.

1113. this is throughout the day. there have been many complaints of vision loss joint pain and fatigue in the us these patients are referred to as opposed to the whole as i talk to multiple doctors and my doctor and they said the feeling that you're going to have a hard time in recovery you're going to be one of those people that they consider a long haul or. else look forward to talking to. people. must obey the orders given by human beings except when conflict with the 1st law.

should be very careful. and the point is. there is. robot must protect its own existence as existence. will. welcome back across talking all things are considered on people about to remind you we're discussing what to do with big tech. ok let's go back to grandma in los angeles sorry my friend we have to go quick

break there you want to finish your thought go ahead yeah we're talking about you know if we're going to do it then it needs to be done under some sort of a legal what what are the laws say like if i advocate violence publicly tell me what that law is and that how how my opinion housing should be regulated right now we have these massive companies as you talked about are basically going after competitors and on the again on the elected tech millionaires are determining what we can and cannot say and i just have a hard time with that specially when there's a guy i used to be in in british intelligence that's an executive at twitter and it's all about data likes and i just don't trust these tech companies at all to tell me what i can and cannot say what their what their real reasons are you know i don't like it and so i think probably the big fundamental problem that we're dealing with here is because traditionally up until recently when we thought some about censorship we thought about censorship coming from the government and so and this is one of the this is how

a lot of these people in big we go out and say well we're not government we're just a private company here ok but i keep going back to my mantra of the disses the public square i think this is where we need to go we have to look at 230 i mean that has to be adjusted i mean the profit margins of these people are so it's so amazing ok you know where you'd have to spend more money to have to have real fact checkers and and based on laws. not your terms of service headline. let's try to stop our theoretical speech for just one second and really call it the way it is on crosstalk if there was no donald trump you wouldn't have any and we wouldn't even be talking about this other b.l.f. group here in our right now because there's always been the clanger the area the rent or whatever it is but big tax is basically was designed or or turn into an empty trump movement it'll come up with excuses

understand this is violence be yeah yeah yeah please go back in turn and try to remove trump from the equation i think for one minute we'd be talking about this do you think that jap dorsey or zuckerberg or anybody would be what even be discussing shutting down a platform if it was a drunk was the reason for this there's always been the let me also say it's a hate is guaranteed speech so long as i don't act i get beat broccoli i get the terrorist i did meet the it doesn't matter we've extrapolated this into this man began the heavy vanilla world where we can see bad things here's another one for you white supremacy i don't even understand what that means but if somebody were to explain what you believe in white people being supreme so what we have lost the concept of what many of these

actual thoughts were incitement or submission or insurrection or plan the anything other than a bunch of blowhards saying about just of it nobody cared about in the 1st you know bit you know you're lying about. you're absolutely right but you know and but that's a very theoretical discussion and i'm talking about real world. events that really your problem is right that hurt people here if you know you're an expert on these things here how did this all happen because you know i remember you know the advent of the internet and i was told it would be a even playing field that was the most democratic thing ever conceived where everyone would be able to participate and now we're having a conversation on this program is that all the different strategies to shut people out in shut people up i mean is it just because it's just power and money or was it somehow corrupted or maybe it was a corrupt idea in the 1st place going. well i disagree that that that's what's

happening. again i want to emphasize i think we've always had prior to the internet the only way you could could there was no public square you know effectively there's no real public square. that you may be really going to go to your local park and maybe a dozen people will listen to you that's ok well i guess technically i don't know that it but in reality noted there was a public square the concept of the word new concept exists for a reason it wasn't made up and public square has been in existence for hundreds of years actually ok keep oh i'm speaking practically practically speaking if you want your voice to to extend beyond your neighborhood you need to go to it before the internet you need to go to a newspaper and if you went to the newspaper you had rules you had to follow certain rules to get your content published it had a past fact checks it had to it had to be not not create liability for the newspaper and so whatever they were and facebook is a publisher they may not like it they don't want to call it that that's

a problem with section $230.00 platforms in order to be exempt from liability for what's carried on them they cannot be publishers but they are publishers so they are responsible so so. that's what's happening here you can't just make up and pardon me for using that 4 letter word and throw it out there for the world to see you could never do that with a newspaper and you shouldn't be able to do it with facebook you can't say that you know it. whatever you like free speech has always been a myth well i mean i mean we recently went through 4 years of the russian gay hoax ok a.j. you can't make stuff up but apparently stuff is made up all of the time or whether it's a mass distraction or you know the financial crisis i mean everything is made up because no one is ever held accountable when things go terribly wrong rahm my daughter's been with me graham is 8 is a far left winger i'm

a conservative but you know the more we talk the more we find common ground on these things because we're looking at what abel's society ok we may differ on how to solve those problems go ahead well yeah i mean i just used to be a very that with respect to what lionel was saying about trump i think i agree that a lot of it was just oh we don't like trump but there there needs to be a clear distinction here when the commander in chief advocates for going to the capitol building and people showing up with their fifteen's and camp auschwitz shirts and and commit violence and people die because mander in chief is different so in that that that needs to be that needs to be addressed and that's not a small thing as all we don't ma'am be pamby we don't like trump that was that that was a really awful thing and you talk that it looked like germany and the you know late twenty's early thirty's now. what the problem is is that they're going to use that for any excuse so now somebody says well i will you know i'm organizing a strike because amazon doesn't have union labor all the hate speech you're out

there you're if you're going to hurt jeff bezos you know trillion dollars or whatever that's where it gets real murky and that's where they're using this to in whatever manner shape they form they can and they can just say as they did after $911.00 ok what happened on $911.00 was awful there's dangerous terrorists out there but then they just wrote the patriot act where a friend of mine who was writing antiwar cartoons against bush was put on the no fly list so that's where it gets real dangerous for me and that they're just going to arbitrarily anyone's a domestic terrorist now and when big massive corporations that are unregulated by nothing they pay no taxes they get tax breaks are doing whatever they want and effectively taking away that the town square as you put it and that that's what's that's what's bad for me well it's actually going well it's a worse in many ways and one of the things that's happened in the last few days is that we're focusing on should big tech be reined in and i think all of us agree

with that it should be done maybe in different ways over a different time scale and things like that how much government involvement it should be again these things are all debated and should be debated but where we have coming out of particularly a o c and people like that that we need there needs to be a federal commission to regulate and investigate media when that's even more chilling ok because at least these platforms are a patchwork of distributing what media reports and some of it is just awful ok nonsense it is some people do december mation that's what they're at their intent is do is it just inform the public and then there's a lot of other good stuff out there but when i hear someone might we not need to start regulating the media well that's making it even far worse lionel. we are losing this it isn't separate state from this this idea of free speech should be dangerous would pledge free speech it is something that i can say that might make

you lose your mind now there's a difference between standing up and saying and i don't we're going to parse what trump said but i disagree minimally i know that he said that he says he is extremely reckless and he's extremely a childes but that's moot he's gone it doesn't matter but there's a difference between saying i want us and. we went from a 10 we love the year by george carlin's 7 dirty words the brandenburg cases supreme court said you can say the whole awful and terrible things but there's as incitement a clear and present danger test we are becoming more and more immune to any in your ring to the notion of we were the center you can't say that you might say something what if you said what if something that was. what if he went in and that newspaper and said you know what. the response i mean we have become so prickly so so what are you going to i don't want anything that gets out of all what's what

so what so do disappointing and it actually terrifying is that there are so many people and i'm sorry on the left at this point in time they will then want more censorship shut him down shut them down ok you know it's because they don't have an argument or don't want to engage in a debate and that's we need to debate now more than ever let me let me go to jeff here because i kind of extrapolated something that line will just say here popular speech doesn't need any protections because it's popular all right fine but it's unpopular speech that need protections here and that and that tests you know are our most important notion of our public existence and that is freedom of speech here and you know this is centuries in the making i mean there are still mitt many people around the world that we just envy the kind. speech privileges and rights that we have now and i'm just i'm so disappointed that so many people want to shut so many people down. i think that i want to i want to just get to the heart of

really maybe the heart of the problem and address in this question about technology the problem with technology is that they have that that because of. because of ad advertising technology and the way that that your truck and the amount of data that's known about you it's possible to create news and and content that you are going to be interested in and to control your feed so that you see more and more and more of what you already believe what you want to see there is no there is no you know i and my feet i may never see grandma or peter or michael if they have if they say things that are different from what i believe and that's not by choice that's facebook's algorithm sending the read foreseen information that's what that's a problem behind these big tech platforms that's what has never it's never existed

before because we've never been at the technological point that we are today where we can feed and inflame groups of people with information that is not true at all you know a good point we've run out of time here but you know what we have in this day and age is that we're all the products ok and that's a very good bet it thanks that's all the time we have want to thank my guests in new york city bank and in los angeles i want to thank our viewers for watching us here at r.t.c. and it's time to remember cross across. some rumors are sinners are. going to be known chris mihm. you may.

remember if you just can't stop for a bit if you're here that oh. i'm talking is a very international community. meeting you through the room if. you decide to keep it as the slow slow slow you need to eat. those who push them at the world food used to cook a brazil through butter nuchal through. is everything produced polluted with it comes to do with the above the. 5 they have and with affected by it decided not to take physics life. with i gave you that.

nuclear become a battleground in the us in vermont people have demanding the shutdown of a local plant for my yankee is right now my focus because it's a very dangerous oh no care power plant the owner is attempting to run the reactor beyond its operational limits this case just sort of puts a magnifying glass on where's the power in this country where's it going is it moving more towards corporate interests or is it more in the idea of a traditional participatory democracy as powerline with the people this case demonstrates that struggle in the very real ways our struggle. right here on this show. because there was no attempt to reform what the banks had done and the global financial crisis was caused by the banks who were hoarding the cash they were sitting on the cash they were lending it here we are in 2021 exactly

as they did reform the banks in fact they just expanded their credit card they expanded their capacity to print and borrow and give away cash to their friends causing now this huge crisis. joe biden is sworn in as the 46 president of the united states. in the quote war between republicans and democrats we look at whether the rift can be. either we're going to resolve these issues peacefully through the battle of ideas or in 10152100 years we will resolve them violently is just a full blown assault on behalf of the democratic party and their alliance when tax national media and tyrants eliminate any way straight any opposition any any

political dissent that's going to challenge.