Opinion
USA – -(AmmoLand.com)- The big tech oligarchs never cease to amaze me. In 2021 it is nearly impossible to conduct business, network, and or stay in contact with people without using social media. Many of AmmoLand’s readers have put forward rather strong opinions on this subject, and like anything else related to personal policies and stances, there is no need to shame others for how they choose to conduct themselves. I use social media, as do many of the other AmmoLand contributors (including AmmoLand News).
On more than one occasion I’ve found so many contradictory stances on things. Free speech is not a thing, or even close to a thing, on certain social media outlets. A close contact of mine got several 30-day bans from a certain service for posting “Joe and the ho.” There was no context to the post…that was it, “Joe and the ho.” While this is not something I personally would subscribe to, I do feel however it is someone’s right to post that, especially since there is no clear breaking of any rules or more importantly illicit violent threats. The same platform would not allow the hashtag “mitchthebitch” to be posted. Anything that goes against the accepted narrative which we the feeble peasants are supposed to take in hook, line, and sinker is censored. The contradictions are endless. I’m sure many other users have found similar situations in their own experiences.
Going through a social media feed recently I ran into a post that had the captain:
“Sensitive Content,” eh?
And below the caption was a picture that had the “Sensitive Content” warning over it. To me, that is just an invitation to see what was posted, not a warning, but rather a tag that says “look at me, look at me.”
Naturally, I clicked on the “See Photo” button. What greeted me next was not something that was grotesque. Nor was it something that would bring on shock and awe. It was something that I would consider a safe and healthy practice. This is what my click revealed:
Somehow the ministry of truth at this social media service decided that youth being guided and instructed on safe gun handling is “sensitive content”. I’m not sure when “enough is going to be enough” with what big tech is allowed to get away with, but “c’mon man”, there is nothing sensitive about this post. Was it tagged as such because of the caption? Once upon a time pictures like the censored one were commonplace in magazine advertisements. Once upon a time gun ownership was not stigmatized, and now’s the perfect time to return that narrative to its rightful status – normal.
Now before all the nay sayers get all up in arms about this and start attacking me by saying things like
“Why are you using that service anyhow?”
or
“When there is no product, you are the product!”
or
Use your imagination. Here is the thing…Social media regardless of what banner it is flying under is supposed to be for everyone. Yes, I believe that we should have alternatives that are friendly that we should use. Yes, I believe every single freedom-minded person is subject to being shut down at a moment’s notice by big tech. And moreover, than that, I believe that there is no reason why “we”, the freedom-loving population, should fold to the freedom-hating population.
We are here. They, they should have to deal with us. So while I fully support people that take an anti-social media stance, 100%, however, that does not mean that we should be alienated, forced to pack up our marbles, and go home. No, a much bigger issue is at hand here, and that is the narrative that is being written is dangerous to our civil liberties.
John Petrolino is a US Merchant Marine Officer, writer, author of Decoding Firearms: An Easy to Read Guide on General Gun Safety & Use and NRA certified pistol, rifle, and shotgun instructor living under and working to change New Jersey’s draconian and unconstitutional gun laws. You can find him on the web at www.johnpetrolino.com on twitter at @johnpetrolino and on instagram @jpetrolinoiii .
I never use any of these sites and would recommend that no one else use them either . You give them credibility when you subscribe to thier censorship . No thanks !
Social media are fond of saying that they own the site, so they control the rules…but the electronic spectrum belongs to the American people and we need to demand the FCC or our elected reps in Congress take control away from the technical oligarchs.
There are condemned souls in Hell who will get ice water in Crystal goblets from the hands of demons before anyone in Congress is able to get a bill passed in either house, much less sign by bumbling Bozo Biden, bitstrips big Tech of their section 230 protections.
Cheers from the oil patch in Central Wyoming
“Social Media” is a toxic dump and anyone who uses it is a fool.
I don’t tweet or have facebook. Never needed it. I just recently got rid of my flip phone. And I miss it.
Yes, my life is pretty normal.
John Petrolia it’s your right to stay on those sights and I agree we should be treated equally and not have to go elsewhere. I wish it were otherwise but it has become painfully obvious that the majority of the media, big tech and now major corporations and business associations have seen fit to try to control us. You see who is winning at the moment. Until we stand up, organize and speak with our dollars and votes it will only get worse. No matter how inconvenient we have to fight fire with fire and cancel these groups with our… Read more »
Regardless of who “should” have access to social media, the majority of our country uses it. Most importantly social media strongly informs world views of those under 40. If they are never exposed to positive images related to firearms, is it any wonder they develop negative attitudes toward us? This is textbook propaganda which we must oppose if we are to retain our rights. Petrolino gets this! I suspect images are flagged as sensitive based primarily on complaints. demanding moms have many useful idiots who troll looking for posts to flag. Not sure how much we can actually blame the… Read more »
“After all some demanding moms seem to disapprove of physical contact of any sort.”
Yeah, because they “ain’t gettin’ or givin’ none”!
Could you imagine being married to one of those harpies? Much less being INTIMATE with one! Yikes! Shrill, demanding, very high maintenance and are driven by their “causes”. NO thanks!
I know someone in a similar situation, not anti-gun, but his wife is CERTIFIABLE, as is pretty much her entire family. He’s very much a gun guy, and is away from home at every opportunity. I cannot blame him.
we are all older ,dont care what people think about us, STRONGLY believe in bill of RIGHTS; most are educated. I dont use social media the lawyer down the street asked me to teach he and his wife how to shoot,but you cant tell anyone;,he was a magistrate in comifornia, the tow faced bs is going to blow up into something nasty and those prepared, it will just be so what shame scotus wont preempt censorship by the masses
Ever since the digital age came into being, users had two picks: agree or decline. No longer do people read the fine print because if you want to play the answer is always yes, there really is no other choice. Social media is exactly that, agree to their rules including censorship or be turned off. We have been systematically programed to check that yes box. We’ve all done it in one form or another, we’ve done it here on this site. The FCC used to impose a strict censorship on television programming as a condition to broadcast, now almost anything… Read more »
How does “linayara” post a SPAM comment with no “Reply” button?
Why don’t you just come out and tell everyone that it was FASCIST BOOK that put the “sensitive content” BS over that picture. They banned me for 30 days for putting up a “grammar nazi” picture of a G that looked vaguely like the nazi sign. Here I’ll post a copy for everyone to see. SUCKERBERG needs to have a baseball bat taken to his disgusting filthy lying psychopathic control freak face. At least one good wack by a Lucille replica. Damn I am disgusted by that freak. 30 days for this:
Language is power O kitty!
Language is the tool that provides knowledge, and knowledge is exponential power!
Anytime someone corrects my grammar I thank them for it, because they are empowering me, not disempowering me.
Shouldn’t you grow a pair?
Cheers from the oil patch from Central Wyoming
Do we include ammoland editors as part of big tech, when posts get the waiting on approval tag. Free speech and the first amendment doesn’t apply to privately owned sites and I understand that you get to decide the rules, but does that rule apply to public traded sites? No one should be afraid of what another says it’s their actions you should watch out for. My 81 year old grandpa said he was going to city hall to complain one day about the utilities getting to expensive in his small town, my dad told him it would do no… Read more »
I just got one from here that says “waiting for approval”.
‘Supposed to be for everyone’? Since when?
Since they receive subsidies. They are monopolies created by politicians. They are poor investments for the tax payer. https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/jul/02/us-cities-and-states-give-big-tech-93bn-in-subsidies-in-five-years-tax-breaks
Then start you own platform; it’s their property respect their rights
If they received NO subsidies you would be correct. But when they use tax dollars or not paying their share of said tax dollars it’s not theirs. https://phibetaiota.net/2020/10/mongoose-addressing-big-tech-censorship-end-government-subsidies-and-government-tolerance-of-censorship-manipulation/
https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/jul/02/us-cities-and-states-give-big-tech-93bn-in-subsidies-in-five-years-tax-breaks
Spoken like one of Communism’s proverbial “useful idiots”. Parler is a prime example of “start your own”. Until Amazon, Twitter, FB, and Google colluded to shut them down. When the market is monopolized or they can buy the competition or shut it down that transcends “start your own”. When the big tech oligarchs own the politicians and “help” write the laws that erect barriers to entry there is no “start your own”. Should the phone company have free reign over your phone conversations because it is “their property”? Or the banks decide who they will or won’t do business with?… Read more »