Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Political Discussion
Reply to "Google explains why searching "idiot" shows up Trump's pictures to internet idiots"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Google is a corporation, they have to do what their conscience tells them is right. They have to build their search engine in the way that makes the most sense - and profits - to them. They don't have a legal obligation to be unbiased. Do we want to start requiring corporations to be unbiased? Apolitical? Not use conscience in determining their business practices? Refuse to allow them to fire employees who say things that are damaging to their business because, free speech? That's all fine with me, but it means regulating the rights of corporations. Is that what you want? [/quote] When a corporation crosses the line and acts as a biased utility, yes[/quote] Unfortunately, Rs and the conservative SCOTUS disagrees with you. A corporation can donate money to politically biased causes, ie, they are acting as a biased utility via their cash. http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/citizens-united-v-federal-election-commission/ Citizens United (ie Tea Party) v. Federal Election Commission [quote]Political spending is a form of protected speech under the First Amendment, and the government may not keep corporations or unions from spending money to support or denounce individual candidates in elections. While corporations or unions may not give money directly to campaigns, they may seek to persuade the voting public through other means, including ads, especially where these ads were not broadcast. ... in an opinion by Justice Anthony Kennedy on January 21, 2010. in a 5-4 decision with an opinion written by Justice Kennedy. Justice Stevens dissented, joined by Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, and Sotomayor.[/quote] BTW, that case was against the bipartisan campaign finance reform act. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-205.pdf [/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics