Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 60

Thread: Alex Jones of Infowars accused of Racial and Sexual Harassment

  1. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    4,147
    Rep Power
    0
    https://www.thewrap.com/alex-jones-i...live-coverage/


    Update on Jones

    . Alex Jones will expand his digital TV and radio program to offer 24-hour live coverage, the InfoWars host announced on his show Monday.

    “We’re real news, not fake news, like the controlled corporate media. People are hungry for it,” Jones told TheWrap on Monday. “Attempts to destroy InfoWars or any other media permutation will fail … to quote V for Vendetta. Ideas are bullet proof,” he added.

    The right-wing commentator and conspiracy theorist — most famous for suggesting the 2012 Sandy Hook massacre was a hoax — told viewers that he was looking to hire at least 15 people.

    “We are launching our biggest recruitment and hiring operation ever in our 23-year-history as we prepare to go 24-hour a day live on TV and radio from the InfoWars news center here in Austin, Texas,” said Jones in his announcement. “We’re looking to hire around 15 people, maybe even more, as we take the information war to the next level in the face of the globalists.”

  2. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    4,147
    Rep Power
    0
    https://www.nbcnews.com/business/bus...piracy-n876881

    Update 6 More families sue Alex Jones for the Sandy Hook Rants.

    The families of six victims of the 2012 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School along with an FBI agent who was among the first to respond to the shooting sued InfoWars’ founder Alex Jones and several of his businesses on Wednesday, alleging the radio personality had defamed them by repeatedly claiming that the shooting was a hoax.

    The new lawsuit, filed in Superior Court in Bridgeport, Connecticut, comes on the heels of two defamation suits filed in Texas last month by two other Sandy Hook families.







    Jones, who could not be reached for comment, responded to the Texas lawsuits on his show last month, acknowledging that he believes the massacre “really happened,” but that the families were being used by the Democratic Party.

    The complaints from all eight families allege that Jones used his internet and radio platforms to push the conspiracy theory that the shooting, in which a gunman killed 20 first-graders and six adults at the school in Newtown, Connecticut, was a staged event. The lawsuits claim that Jones’ false narratives have brought him attention and money, while the families have suffered deep personal pain as well as abuse from fans of Jones.

  3. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    4,147
    Rep Power
    0
    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/n...523-story.html

    Update now an FBI Agent has filed a lawsuit against Alex Jones over the Sandy Hook rants.

    Six more families of the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre victims sued right-wing radio host and conspiracy theorist Alex Jones for alleged defamation Wednesday for claiming the shooting was a hoax and the relatives are paid actors.

    An FBI agent who responded to the shooting joined the families as a plaintiff in the lawsuit filed in Bridgeport Superior Court in Connecticut. The families of two other victims filed similar defamation lawsuits against Jones last month in Travis County, Texas, where his media company, Infowars, is based.

    A gunman killed 20 first-graders and six educators at the Newtown, Connecticut, school on Dec. 14, 2012. The families say Jones' comments have tormented them and subjected them to harassment and death threats by his followers.

    "He knew his claims were false but he made them anyway to further a simple but pathetic goal: to make money by tearing away at the families' pain," said Josh Koskoff, a lawyer for the families. "This lawsuit seeks to hold Alex Jones and his financial network accountable for those disgraceful actions."

    Jones did not immediately respond to a message seeking comment Wednesday.

    The lawsuit seeks monetary and punitive damages, attorney fees and other costs. It does not say exactly how much money the families are seeking.

    After the first two lawsuits were filed last month, Jones responded in a YouTube video, saying that the families are being used by the Democratic Party and the news media and that he believes Sandy Hook "really happened." He also invited parents who lost their children to his show to have a "real discussion" about guns, and said believes the lawsuits will be thrown out.

    The plaintiffs include the parents of four children killed at the school — Daniel Barden, Dylan Hockley, Ben Wheeler and Avielle Richman. Also suing are relatives of two slain educators — school Principal Dawn Hochsprung and first-grade teacher Victoria Soto. FBI agent William Aldenberg, one of the first responders to the scene, also is a plaintiff.

    Also named as defendants is Wolfgang Halbig, who the families say is a frequent guest on Jones' show who also questions whether the school shooting actually happened.

    Halbig, 71, a former police officer who lives in Sorrento, Florida, said Wednesday that he does believe people died in the shooting, but authorities have refused to answer his questions. He said police won't give him a copy of radio transmissions from a state police helicopter that responded to the shooting, won't say why paramedics and emergency medical technicians weren't allowed in the school and won't say who pronounced the deaths of all the children.

    In separate lawsuits filed last month in Texas, the parents of slain children Jesse Lewis and Noah Pozner sued Jones seeking more than $1 million in damages for alleged defamation.

    The lawsuit filed Wednesday cites actions by Jones' followers.

    It mentions Edgar Maddison, a North Carolina man sentenced to prison for shooting up a Washington, D.C., pizza restaurant in 2016, believing a conspiracy theory that prominent Democrats were harboring child sex slaves there. The lawsuit says Maddison had watched an Infowars video about the "pizzagate" conspiracy theory.

    The lawsuit also cites the case of a Florida woman, Lucy Richards, who believed the shooting was a hoax and was sentenced to prison last year for threatening the father of one of the slain children.

  4. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    4,147
    Rep Power
    0


    More updates on Alex Jones

  5. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    4,147
    Rep Power
    0

  6. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    4,147
    Rep Power
    0
    http://www.tampabay.com/news/militar...2016_167941638

    Here we go on Jones

    It was interesting to read the other day that Michael Hayden, the retired Air Force four-star general who went on to run the CIA, NSA and serve as principle deputy director of the Department of National Intelligence, believes the controversy over a 2015 military training exercise in the United States helped pave the way for the Russian information operation in the 2016 presidential election.

    I made the same point back in December as a guest speaker at a gathering here in Tampa, the NATO-U.S. Special Operations Command Joint Senior Psychological Operations Conference.

    Appearing on MSNBC?s Morning Joe as part of a book tour, Hayden said controversy about the Jade Helm 15 training exercise was exploited by Russians trying to sow division in the American public.

    "They took their game to North America in 2015, and I won?t belabor it here but there was an exercise in Texas called Jade Helm 15 that Russian bots and the American alt-right media convinced most ? many ? Texans was an Obama plan to round up political dissidents," Hayden said on Morning Joe, as reported by the Austin American-Statesman. "It got so much traction that the governor of Texas had to call out the National Guard to observe the federal exercise to keep the population calm."



    Just to recap, Jade Helm 15 was a military training exercise, held in 2015 across states including Florida, in which commandos and conventional forces prepared for the kind of urban warfare that military planners have been bracing for. Think the bloody battle to retake Mosul in Iraq earlier this year.

    The argument I made to a room full of the world?s top practitioners of information operations was that by trying to convince people that Jade Helm 15 was instead a military plot to take over the country, radio host and conspiracy theorist Alex Jones shaped the information battlespace through his InfoWars website in a way that benefited the Russians.

    By taking bits and pieces of real information, including a 2014 story I wrote about a demonstration that international commandos put on at a Special Operations conference in Tampa, Jones and his minions constructed their delusional narrative.

    But while delusional, it was enough, Hayden noted, for Texas Gov. Greg Abbott to make sure the commandos weren?t pulling off the dirty deeds Jones swore they would.

    Seeing the confusion and mistrust sowed by InfoWars, albeit on a small scale, the Russians were emboldened to conduct their information operation against the 2016 presidential election ? an effort on their part to sow confusion and mistrust on a far grander scale.



    The Russians, Hayden said, were not just observers of the InfoWars delusion. Echoing the reporting of Clint Watts, a former infantry officer, FBI agent and executive officer of the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point, Hayden said a Russian army of online bots helped amplify the discord.

    Their information operation against the 2016 election succeeded on a grand scale. Our government is still paralyzed by an ongoing investigation into whether the campaign of Donald Trump colluded with the Russians. Meanwhile, the ideologic fissures in an already divided nation have been deepened as a result.

    There was, of course, nothing really groundbreaking in my observation. The Russian activities were classic psychological operations. If you want to really visualize it, I suggest watching Rod Serling?s Twilight Zone episode, The Monsters Are Due on Maple Street, which first aired three days after I was born.

    Nor is the concept of "fake news" even new. Ben Franklin used fake news, concocting propaganda stories about murderous "scalping" Indians working in league with the British King George III to whip up anti-royal fervor among the colonials.

    But the theme of the Tampa conference was "Fake News: Identification, Susceptiblity and Inoculation." So I thought it important, from my vantage point as a newspaper reporter, to point out to the audience that what is often now termed fake news is either something people don?t like to see written or broadcast about themselves or honest errors in facts, something we all make.

  7. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    4,147
    Rep Power
    0
    https://variety.com/2018/digital/new...ch-1202887980/


    Alex Jones is Suspended from facebook for his rants.

  8. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    4,147
    Rep Power
    0
    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alex-jo...ation-lawsuit/

    Here is the latest on Jones

    Court hearings will resume Thursday in lawsuits against radio host and conspiracy theorist Alex Jones. Several families from the 2012 Sandy Hook massacre are suing Jones for defamation over his claims the school shooting was a hoax. A man who Jones' website misidentified as the gunman in the Parkland school shooting has also filed a defamation suit against him.

    Jones' attorney argues that his client's past comments are protected by free speech and the suits should be dismissed, reports CBS News' Tony Dokoupil. Although Jones now admits the Sandy Hook shooting was real, he stands by the message he has been spreading to his estimated 5 million listeners.

    Jones was not in the Texas courtroom on Wednesday where his attorneys tried to dismiss the first of at least three defamation lawsuits against the radio host. Instead, Jones was at his Austin-based Infowars headquarters addressing ? among other things ? his ongoing legal fight.

    The parents of six-year-old Noah Pozner, who was killed in the Sandy Hook massacre, say Jones' followers have tormented them with death threats, forcing them to move seven times. They're seeking more than $1 million in damages


  9. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    4,147
    Rep Power
    0
    https://techcrunch.com/2018/08/02/sp...ct-alex-jones/

    Yesterday, Spotify became the third tech platform in just over a week to take a stance on Alex Jones’s controversial far-right and conspiracy theorist content. The streaming service removed several Infowars podcast episodes due to their violation of the policy against hate content that Spotify released in May. This action follows strikes given against Jones by both YouTube and Facebook for videos containing content that violated those companies’ policies, including Islamophobic and transphobic hate speech and child endangerment.

    In a statement to Bloomberg on Wednesday, a spokeswoman for Spotify said the following:

    We take reports of hate content seriously and review any podcast episode or song that is flagged by our community. Spotify can confirm it has removed specific episodes of ‘The Alex Jones Show’ podcast for violating our hate content policy.
    While Spotify did not reveal the specific episodes removed or the specific terms of the policy they violated, the possibilities for removal cited in its updated policy include “content whose principal purpose is to incite hatred or violence against people because of their race, religion, disability, gender identity, or sexual orientation.” The policy also states that these violations do not necessarily include “offensive, explicit, or vulgar content,” but specifically hate speech with the intention to cause harm.

    Other episodes of the Infowars podcast are still available on Spotify, as well as Apple Podcast and Stitcher.

    While this strike against Jones does come on the heels of YouTube and Facebook’s previous actions, Jones is not the first to have content removed via Spotify’s new policy. In May, the company pulled music from R. Kelly and rappers XXXTentacion and Tay-K, as well.

  10. #35
    Administrator mydeathspace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Death Valley
    Posts
    13,589
    Rep Power
    21474863
    I wonder if FB, YouTube, Spotify, etc. removing this piece of garbage actually helps him out more. I assume he is losing revenue, but won't his nut-job followers find different methods of watching/listening to him?

    Really hope Jones goes the way of R. Budd Dwyer. Right in front of the cameras.

  11. #36
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    4,147
    Rep Power
    0
    http://www.gcnlive.com/JW1D/index.ph...itself-trouble

    Yes Alex Jones is owned by a company called GCN Radio. If you are wondering who they are it's Alex Joneses contract holders for radio and TV.

  12. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    4,147
    Rep Power
    0
    http://www.gcnlive.com/JW1D/index.ph...e=onDem&show=1

    GCN has official podcasts for Alex Jones though.

  13. #38

  14. #39
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    4,147
    Rep Power
    0
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-45107687

    http://time.com/5361874/twitter-jack...-sean-hannity/

    Update Alex Jones will stay on Twitter for now

    Facing mounting scrutiny for allowing conspiracy theorist Alex Jones to remain on the platform, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey gave an exclusive radio interview to Fox News host Sean Hannity on Wednesday, explaining how such decisions are made.

    Dorsey said that when considering whether to remove extremist accounts from the site, he relies on reports from users who are experiencing or witnessing harassment and then considers the “context of everything that’s happening around it.”

    “There might be violent extremist groups that try to get onto our service, and we take that into consideration. We also look, in those particular cases, at off-platform behavior as well,” he said.

    Jones — whose content was removed this week from Facebook, YouTube, Spotify and Apple for violating hate speech guidelines — has fueled false conspiracy theories about the deadly 2012 Sandy Hook elementary school shooting. The conspiracy theories have resulted in harassment and death threats to victims’ family members, some of whom have been forced into hiding and are now suing Jones for defamation. But Twitter has decided not to suspend Jones or his website InfoWars.

    “We know that’s hard for many but the reason is simple: he hasn’t violated our rules. We’ll enforce if he does. And we’ll continue to promote a healthy conversational environment by ensuring tweets aren’t artificially amplified,” Dorsey said in a series of tweets on Tuesday. “Truth is we’ve been terrible at explaining our decisions in the past. We’re fixing that. We’re going to hold Jones to the same standard we hold to every account, not taking one-off actions to make us feel good in the short term, and adding fuel to new conspiracy theories.”


    Hannity’s own role in promoting a conspiracy theory about the death of Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich sparked criticism and cost him advertisers last year. On Wednesday, Hannity praised Dorsey and asked if he had received requests to ban him from Twitter as well.

    “I haven’t heard those requests directly, but I’m sure someone is saying it somewhere,” Dorsey said.

    Asked whether Twitter should allow all kinds of speech to exist on the platform, except for violence, Dorsey said there should be some limits.

    “I think there’s always boundaries to that,” he said. “You enumerated a number of them around violent threats or giving up personal information around someone’s home or office, or identifiable information that people could utilize to put them in real physical harm. We need to balance all of those constraints. We’ve tried to codify them in our terms of service. We do believe in the power of free expression, but we also need to balance that with the fact that bad-faith actors intentionally try to silence other voices.”

  15. #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    4,147
    Rep Power
    0
    https://www.polygon.com/2018/3/7/170...-youtube-purge

    Here are Places where Alex Jones fans might go to

    Controversial YouTubers head to alternative platforms in wake of ‘purge’
    Over an alleged attack on free speech
    By Julia Alexander Mar 7, 2018, 1:30pm EST
    SHARE
    SteemIt’s CEO Ned Scott doesn’t believe in censorship; a stance that has won him and his platform fans in recent months.

    The appeal of video platform, DTube, which runs on the Steem blockchain database, is almost directly tied to what many creators allege has been happening on YouTube for more than a year: the “YouTube Purge,” an alleged condemnation of right-wing political channels, pro-gun advocates and conspiracy theorists, that’s led to claims of censorship on Google’s video platform.


    As YouTube attempts to crack down on content it deems hateful, bullying or promoting dangerous conspiracy theories, people are looking for alternatives. DTube is a decentralized video platform with little to no moderation that uses cryptocurrency and blockchain technology to pay its users. BitChute is similar, but whereas DTube takes much of its design inspiration from YouTube, BitChute looks like an older version of LiveLeaks. The creators of BitChute describe themselves as a “small team making a stand against Internet censorship because we believe it is the right thing to do.”

    BitChute and DTube don’t rely on advertising revenue. Instead users can send peer-to-peer payments.

    It’s a tantalizing prospect for YouTube users who feels like they’ve been pushed off the platform, even if the company feels otherwise. The question is whether an alternative platform can actually compete with YouTube and take some of YouTube’s biggest creators.

    DTube
    JokerProductions/YouTube
    BITCHUTE AND DTUBE APPEAL TO A VERY SPECIFIC AUDIENCE
    The front page of BitChute greets visitors with videos on very specific topics: Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, censorship and conspiracy theories like “PizzaGate.” Conspiracy videos capitalize on recent tragedies, alleging that survivors of the Parkland high school shooting are crisis actors. DTube isn’t much different.


    It’s the type of content that, if they were on YouTube, advertisers wouldn’t want their ads placed on. YouTube has filters for some of its biggest advertisers to help ensure their ads don’t appear on videos they don’t feel comfortable with. Those filters include “Tragedy and Conflict;” “Sensitive Social Issues;” “Sexually Suggestive Content;” “Sensational & Shocking;” and “Profanity & Rough Language,” according to CNN. YouTube isn’t taking these videos down. Type “PizzaGate” into YouTube’s search bar and you’ll find more than 205,000 results, but the chances of these videos being monetized are much slimmer.

    SteemIt CEO Ned Scott told Polygon that because YouTube is so reliant on advertisers, the company has to worry about those concerns when thinking of how best to run its platform. SteemIt takes a different approach; one that DTube, which runs on Steem, seems to echo.

    “If someone reports a video for infringing on copyright, it’s our legal responsibility to take the video down and investigate, which we’ll do,” Scott said. “But we aren’t policing content.”

    Thanks to their laissez faire moderation, DTube and BitChute are becoming home to controversial and disturbing topics. And some of DTube and BitChute’s biggest proponents are notable voices speaking out against the purge on YouTube.

    “BUT WE AREN’T POLICING CONTENT”
    Dave Cullen is an Irish YouTuber better known as Computing Forever. He gained prominence on YouTube for his ultra-nationalistic, xenophobic views, speaking out about immigration in Ireland. In a recent video, “The Storm is Coming #YouTubePurge,” he explored the idea of finding a new home at YouTube alternatives. Most of these creators are still on YouTube to some extent, but there are ongoing conversations about what comes next.


    “It’s really down to us,” Cullen said. “I hope you’ll support the people who have been affected in the way that they have. It’s just inevitable, whatever happens. I would encourage you to follow everyone you can, myself included, on the alternative platforms and please make that extended effort.

    “Because before too long, that’s going to be home. I have a feeling.”

    It’s important to acknowledge who some of the biggest proponents are for platforms like BitChute and DTube are. They have the support of prominent alt-right voices, like Cullen; Stefan Molyneux, who is best known for his stance on eugenics and white supremacy; Mike Cernovich, one of the founding leaders of the alt-right; Jack Posobiec, a DeploraBall inauguration party organizer and a pro-Trump figure who headed multiple misinformation campaigns; Ethan Ralph, best known for helping to spearhead the hateful GamerGate movement; and conspiracy theorist Paul Joseph Watson.

    “SOCIAL PLATFORMS ARE A NATURAL PLACE TO TEST SOME OF THESE THEORIES”
    Companies like Gab, which has been described as the go-to social platform for the alt-right, have publicly shown their support for BitChute. BitChute itself plays into the concept of YouTube censoring content.

    The heart of the issue is still how people perceive YouTube and how it polices content; whereas many users see YouTube as a public forum, the fact remains that YouTube is a private company.

    YOUTUBE CAN DO WHATEVER IT WANTS
    First Amendment activists are quick to cry foul when platforms like YouTube, Twitter and Facebook moderate content in any way, but that’s the company’s prerogative. YouTube isn’t a government body; it’s a business that can moderate its content as it sees fit.

    There’s a legal principle that’s often used when discussing this matter: promissory estoppel. Promissory estoppel essentially refers to an informal promise that a company has made, which its users feel beholden to. When Robert Kynlc, YouTube’s head of business, told YouTuber Casey Neistat that the companies four core beliefs are freedom of speech, freedom of information, freedom of opportunity and freedom to belong, people took that to mean any type of speech was allowed.

    Woodrow Hartzog, a professor of law and computer science at Northeastern University, told Wired that the issue with the principle is that it’s too broad.

    “Social platforms are a natural place to test some of these theories, because of the power that they have and the importance of free speech in our democracy,” Hartzog said.

    “WHAT YOUTUBE DOES RESTRICT, AND APPLY COMMUNITY GUIDELINE STRIKES FOR, IS HATEFUL CONTENT”
    YouTube is one of the world’s biggest social platforms, and it’s trying to crack down on dangerous content. That’s why conspiracy videos are being removed and why, the company says, moderators may have been a little too aggressive with flagging content and handing out strikes. Still, the company isn’t trying to shut down channels en masse, nor is it trying to restrict content.

    PragerU, a right-wing “university” that was designed to exploit YouTube and Google’s algorithm, recently noticed that its videos were restricted. The channel, which has racked up close to a billion views, accused YouTube of censorship. YouTube told The Guardian those accusations were meritless, adding that the videos “weren’t excluded from Restricted Mode [a mode that only showcases certain content] because of politics or ideology.”

    YOUTUBE’S HATEFUL CONTENT PROBLEM IS GROWING
    What YouTube does restrict, and apply community guideline strikes for, is hateful content. Some of Infowars’ Alex Jones’ videos were taken down recently because they violated the company’s rules on cyberbullying and harassment. One of those videos referred to David Hogg, a survivor of the Parkland shooting, as a crisis actor. That action against Infowars helped kickstart mainstream discussion about the YouTube Purge,


    Even though there are logical, clearly communicated reasons for why certain videos were taken down or removed, it hasn’t stopped cries of censorship. Anthony Fantano, a popular music critic on YouTube who recently started uploading to DTube, told Polygon that he believes YouTube has a right to do what they want. But he wants YouTube to be clear about its approach.

    “I feel like if you don’t want to have conspiracy-based content on the platform because you feel like there’s a moral conundrum there with having a platform that is spreading this misinformation by way of being able to host it, I wish they would come out and say it,” Fantano said. “I just wish YouTube was a little bit more transparent, even going forward, with what they do and don’t want on the site.”

    Fantano also said that having more competition will be a “net positive” for the creator community, noting that it bothered him personally that “the competition has sort of become stagnant.”

    “IT ALLOWS CONTENT CREATORS TO MONETIZE POTENTIALLY HARMFUL MATERIAL”
    DTube and BitChute offer a very specific kind of competition right now: conspiracy videos and right-wing talking heads. Conspiracy videos created under the false pretense of political observation, which many researchers and academics view as dangerous, is something that YouTube is trying to crack down on.

  16. #41
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    4,147
    Rep Power
    0
    https://www.businessinsider.com/vime...x-jones-2018-8



    Vimeo a YouTube competitor has boycott Alex Jones

    . Vimeo has removed Alex Jones' InfoWars from its platform for violating the company's Terms of Service standards, a Vimeo spokesperson told Business Insider on Sunday.

    The videos, posted on Thursday and Friday "violated our Terms of Service prohibitions on discriminatory and hateful content," the spokesperson said, adding that Vimeo had notified the account owner and issued a refund, as "we do not want to profit from content of this nature in any way."

    InfoWars became a hot-button topic internally at Vimeo last week, Business Insider has learned, with several employees at the company upset that the account was allowed to remain on the platform. Employees took to messaging platform Slack to discuss their dissatisfaction with the company's handling of the issue, sources said.

    Vimeo's decision comes on the heels of Facebook, YouTube and Apple recently removing videos by InfoWars and its founder Alex Jones. In the videos, he denounced Muslim immigrants to Europe and the creators of a transgender cartoon. Twitter, on the other hand, has yet to remove Jones or InfoWars from its platform.

  17. #42
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    4,147
    Rep Power
    0
    https://radioink.com/2018/08/13/the-...sible-content/

    another take on Jones

    (By John Garziglia)Alex Jones, a self-described libertarian and paleoconservative and publisher of the infowars.com website, is broadcast on 114 radio stations. Recently, his content was removed by YouTube, Facebook and Apple. Is there a case to be made that radio stations should likewise question his broadcast content?

    This article will not delve into a discussion of the various theories and conspiracies that make up a portion of Alex Jones’ content. That is for others. Rather, the question for FCC licensees is that, when three major social platform aggregators remove content, should radio stations take notice and likewise assess the prudence of carrying the same content?

    As private companies, YouTube, Facebook, and Apple, have every right to remove or refuse content consistent with their own policies. By doing so, however, each may be entering into a difficult line-drawing exercise. While the removal of Alex Jones content may be defended on a truth and veracity basis, the question becomes where the line is drawn.

    The social media giants have certain established policies for their content. Some of the claimed policy violations resulting in their various take-downs of Alex Jones’ content include policies against child endangerment, hate speech, bullying, harassment, glorifying violence, and using dehumanising language to describe people who are transgender, Muslims and immigrants.

    It is worth noting that there are significant laws against child endangerment, bullying and harassment. When such conduct occurs either on social media or the old-fashioned way using mail or personally-delivered threats, it is hoped that law enforcement authorities will quickly step in. Indeed, that is the brightest line – when content is illegal or is fostering illegality, the content should not be broadcast.

    Which brings us to Alex Jones and similar radio broadcasts – should they stay or should they go? Certainly, no radio station licensee wants to broadcast content that endangers children, or is bullying or harassing.

    Radio station licensees may have a legal and regulatory exposure far beyond that of social media platforms for scurrilous content. Radio stations may be exposed to a full panoply of legal actions, as well as a variety of other causes of action, for harmful content. Both social media and radio stations could find themselves in the cross-hairs of a lawsuit if questionable content incited violence or otherwise provoked illegality.

    A radio station with an FCC license to serve the public interest has an obligation to itself and to its listeners to offer information and viewpoints that stand up to a test of integrity that each licensee itself initially establishes. Therefore, radio stations must be especially sensitive to changing social mores as to what constitutes beyond-the-bounds programming.

    The broadcast content offered by radio personalities seeking self-aggrandizement and notoriety for cutting-edge programming, conspiracy theories, and falsehoods, can be theater-of-the-mind, or can be a wasteland. The challenge for each radio station licensee is determining when provocative radio programming goes over the line of marginally-acceptable content to become intolerable and dangerous.

    Finding that amorphous veracity line which should not be crossed is neither easy nor obvious. It is the responsibility of every radio station licensee and manager to determine what content should be refused. Social media banning Alex Jones should engender an immediate assessment by each of his affiliates to determine whether his content has also crossed your own policy line of what should be, or should not be, broadcast on your radio station.

  18. #43
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    4,147
    Rep Power
    0
    If you are wondering what the Radio Ink means by broadcast content that endangers children, or is bullying or harassing.

    We have Some VIdeos other Youtube Pundits made on Jones






  19. #44
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    4,147
    Rep Power
    0





  20. #45
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    4,147
    Rep Power
    0

    Austin pirate radio station, flagship for Alex Jones, faces $15k fine

    https://www.mystatesman.com/business...jegmfqznULCLN/

    Here we go on Jones again
    . A pirate radio station that serves as controversial host Alex Jones? Austin flagship has been knocked off the city?s airwaves ? at least temporarily ? and the Federal Communications Commission has levied a $15,000 penalty that the station?s operators are refusing to pay.
    A lawsuit filed this week in U.S. District Court in Austin accuses Liberty Radio of operating at 90.1 FM without federal consent since at least 2013. Religious programming was airing on that frequency Wednesday, in place of Liberty Radio.


    A check of the Liberty Radio website, txlr.net, indicated the station stopped being transmitted over the air in December, but has been streaming online and via a call-in ?listen line.?

    RELATED: Bans don?t seem to be lessening reach of Alex Jones, InfoWars

    According to court documents, FCC enforcement agents from Houston were called to the Austin area to investigate 90.1 FM after the agency received a complaint. Using high-tech equipment, those agents were able to trace the signal to the Orchard Plaza apartments at 1127 and 1205 E. 52nd St. in East Austin.

    The agents reported that Liberty Radio was being operated out of some sort of maintenance or utility room at the complex. Travis Central Appraisal District records indicate that up until late last year, the complex ? subject of numerous well-publicized city nuisance violations ? had been owned by an entity linked to Walter Olenick and M. Rae Nadler-Olenick, who are listed as the two defendants in the federal lawsuit over Liberty Radio.

  21. #46
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    4,147
    Rep Power
    0
    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ms/1023068002/

    Alex Jones facing allegations for destroying Evidence

    Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones intentionally destroyed evidence as pressure steadily mounted from pending defamation lawsuits and "growing public indignation," according to a court motion filed Friday by families of Sandy Hook murder victims.

    Jones and his Infowars media group face lawsuits for claiming that the 2012 Sandy Hook elementary school mass killings in Connecticut were staged by the government and that the 26 people slain were fictitious creations in an elaborate hoax.

    The latest court action against him, filed in Travis County, Texas and first reported by the New York Times, alleges that Infowars "intentionally deleted a variety of social media pages and video content relating to the Sandy Hook shooting." Lawyers for the Sandy Hook families discovered the intentional destruction of evidence earlier this month, according to the court motion.

    The pages and the videos were being sought as evidence against Jones in the ongoing defamation cases. Jones had been informed by lawyers for the plaintiffs that he was required by law to preserve the information as part of standard evidence rules in court cases, the motion said.

    "Relevant evidence has been lost," lawyers for the families said in the court filing. "As pressure mounted . . . Mr. Jones chose to destroy the evidence of his actual malice and defamatory conduct."

    Infowars did not respond to an email sent by USA TODAY, seeking comment on the allegations.

    Jones, who also has claimed that survivors of the Parkland, Florida, high school shooting were actors, has been increasingly under fire. Twitter suspended the personal account of Infowars for one week Tuesday for violating the social media company's rules against inciting violence.

    YouTube, Apple, Facebook remove 'Alex Jones Show'

    The social network said in a statement that Jones' account "currently has limited functionality." Jones was told the account would regain full functionality seven days after the removal of a tweet with "a broadcast in violation of our rules."

    The decision was made after Jones tweeted a link to a video calling for supporters to get their “battle rifles” ready against media and others.

    In the latest court filing, lawyers representing families of two Sandy Hook victims asked a judge to impose punitive sanctions, possibly a fine, against Infowars.

    Leonard Pozner, who lost his 6-year-old son in the shooting and joined a lawsuit against Jones, said his family has suffered threats and harassment after Jones' claims. The threats have come from other conspiracy theorists who told Pozner his son never existed.

    Facebook said on Monday that four pages belonging to Jones were removed for violating the social network's policy against hate speech. Also on Monday, the entirety of hundreds of episodes of "The Alex Jones Show" had been removed from music streaming service Spotify.

    Those takedowns came just hours after Apple late Sunday removed all episodes of the show hosted by Jones and four other Infowars-related podcasts from Apple's iTunes and Podcast apps.

  22. #47
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    4,147
    Rep Power
    0
    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...m-says-n901811

    More reports of the Alex Jones boycott and its connected to the Sandy Hook Boycott.

    Far-right agitator Alex Jones has been deleting social media posts about his conspiracy theory that the 2012 Sandy Hook mass shooting, which took the lives of 20 children and six adults, was a government hoax.

    A Friday court filing on behalf of the father of a victim of the attack claims the removal amounts to destruction of evidence. The deletion of content that reflects Jones' view of the tragedy as a manufactured story using actors means that evidence is lost, the motion for sanctions claims.

    Jones has been under pressure from critics who believe he and his Infowars brand shouldn't have free reign to inflict pain on victims via social media platforms. Facebook, YouTube and Apple have taken steps to remove Jones and Infowars. Twitter put Jones' account on a seven-day timeout Tuesday after finding that a post linking to a video in which he told his listeners to get “battle rifles” ready was a violation of its terms.

    Infowars' reports and videos on Sandy Hook have blamed victims' parents, as well as the government, for manufacturing what it states was a hoax. Parents have been singled out by Jones, and his followers have issued threats against them.

    Jones said during an Infowars broadcast last week that he instructed staffers to delete some social media posts in reaction to a news report the previous day that pointed out several posts appeared to violate Twitter's rules.

    " ... It is clear from Mr. Jones’ own admissions that relevant evidence has been lost," the filing reads. "As pressure mounted from pending defamation lawsuits and growing public indignation, Mr. Jones chose to destroy the evidence of his actual malice and defamatory conduct ... "

    Southern California journalist Brooke Binkowski has been tracking Jones' social media, and her work was cited in the Texas claim. It states Binkowski "was able to confirm that specific InfoWars messages" were deleted after news reports came out about their apparent violation of Twitter's rules.

    "I think he might have deleted every single reference to Sandy Hook parents," she told NBC News.

    But while the filing claims "these materials are fruitful sources of evidence," Binkowski says she has preserved it. "I got it all," she said.

    The claim was filed on behalf of Sandy Hook parent Neil Heslin, a plaintiff in a larger defamation suit against Jones. His attorney, Mark D. Bankston, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Jones, Infowars and Twitter also did not respond.

    Heslin is seeking fees, costs and court sanctions, and he also wants the court to regard the deleted material, including "hours of video," as "defamatory in their own right."

  23. #48
    It was aliens raisedbywolves's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    14,475
    Rep Power
    21474858
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/al...id=mailsignout

    Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones has failed to shut down a defamation lawsuit brought against him by the parents of a Sandy Hook victim.

    Judge Scott Jenkins of the 53rd District Court ruled in Austin, Texas, on Thursday that the Infowars host must face claims from Leonard Pozner and Veronique De La Rosa. They’re seeking more than $1 million in damages for his repeated lies about the 2012 massacre. The ruling came after Jones attempted to get his case dismissed earlier this month.

    “After considering the arguments of counsel and the record, including plaintiffs’ declarations filed on August 2, the court ORDERS that defendants’ motion is in all respects DENIED,” the court filing said.

  24. #49
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    4,147
    Rep Power
    0
    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny-n...903-story.html

    https://www.businessinsider.com/jack...x-jones-2018-9

    Twitter and Alex Jones over its account.

    . TECH
    FINANCE
    POLITICS
    STRATEGY
    LIFE
    INTELLIGENCE
    ALL

    Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey reportedly overruled staff on decision to ban Alex Jones
    Greg Sandoval 2h
    Jack Dorsey, 2015
    Mike Blake/Reuters
    Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey has personally made decisions about whether some high-profile Twitter accounts were booted or not from the social network, according to a story in the Wall Street Journal.
    Dorsey has at times overruled his subordinates, and it was he who decided to keep Alex Jones, the controversial conservative pundit on the platform last month after staff had decided to ban him, the newspaper reported.
    Twitter spokespeople called claims that Dorsey ever overruled staff or unilaterally made decisions on these matters "totally false."
    Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey overruled a decision made by his staff last month to ban Alex Jones, the conservative pundit and conspiracy theorist, from the social network, the Wall Street Journal reported on Monday.

    Dorsey decided that Jones' account would remain on Twitter though his staff wanted to follow moves made by Google's YouTube and Facebook and ban him from their service. Dorsey has made unilateral decisions on whether Twitter accounts belonging to other high-profile people --accused of violating the site's terms of service -- remained on the site or were removed, according to the Journal's story.

    Among them were alt-right leader Richard Spencer. The Journal reported that Spencer was accused by Twitter's trust-and-safety team of operating too many accounts and wanted him kicked off, but Dorsey decided that though his accounts would be reduced to one, he would remain on the site.

    The claims made in the Journal's story are "totally false," according to a statement issued by Twitter spokespeople to the Journal.

  25. #50
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    4,147
    Rep Power
    0
    https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/06/twit...-accounts.html

    Update on Jones

    Alex Jones of Infowars, conducts a news conference outside a Senate (Select) Intelligence Committee hearing in Dirksen Building where Sheryl Sandberg, Facebook COO, and Jack Dorsey, Twitter CEO, were testifying on the influence of foreign operations on social media on September 5, 2018.
    Twitter has permanently banned the accounts of right-wing conspiracy theorist and radio host Alex Jones and InfoWars for violating the company's abusive behavior policies, the company said Thursday.

    The ban appears to be related to a heated exchange between Jones and a CNN reporter Wednesday, which Jones live-streamed on the Twitter-owned video service Periscope. Jones ranted at the reporter, as well as Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, following back-to-back congressional hearings where Dorsey addressed online election interference, as well as accusations of political bias and conservative censorship on the platform.

    "We took this action based on new reports of Tweets and videos posted yesterday that violate our abusive behavior policy, in addition to the accounts' past violations," the company said in a series of tweets. "We wanted to be open about this action given the broad interest in this case."

    The ban comes weeks after Jones' accounts were removed or suspended by other major tech companies including Apple, Facebook and YouTube. Twitter had initially declined to take disciplinary action against Jones, saying the accounts had not violated community guidelines, but later suspended him from posting on his accounts for a period of seven days.

    Accounts for Jones and Infowars were also banned from Periscope. Jones will not be able to recreate his presence on the sites under another account.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •