Katie Hopkins

[melthebell 862]

19 minutes ago, casualbystander said:

more censorship by the soppy left liberal leaning media platform?

and?...............

9 minutes ago, casualbystander said:

same commercial decision that tried to ban POTUS? well well free speech being censored eh? seems some are more free to speak than others eh?

 

thats a home goal if i ever saw one, the funny thing about this statement is..................................trump has never been banned, or suspended despite what ever falsities he decides to come up with next. if i or you said the things he said we'd be banned and our tweets removed in a heartbeat. He seems to have more freedom of speech than anybody else on the planet.

[Guest makapaka]

20 minutes ago, casualbystander said:

more censorship by the soppy left liberal leaning media platform?

Imagine wanting Katie hopkins to have access to twitter to spread all her hate.

 

 

[Pettytom 1]

12 minutes ago, casualbystander said:

same commercial decision that tried to ban POTUS? well well free speech being censored eh? seems some are more free to speak than others eh?

 

The same commercial decision, yes.

 

You right whingers are supposed to approve of the free market.

 

Free speech is an illusion anyway.

[altus 537]

12 minutes ago, casualbystander said:

same commercial decision that tried to ban POTUS? well well free speech being censored eh? seems some are more free to speak than others eh?

 

Nobody is stopping either of them speaking.

 

Nobody has an obligation to provide them with a platform. They could easily host their own web site if they wished.

[Guest makapaka]

12 minutes ago, casualbystander said:

same commercial decision that tried to ban POTUS? well well free speech being censored eh? seems some are more free to speak than others eh?

 

She can say what she wants -

whenever she  wants - just not on Twitter - cos they won’t let her use their product because she’s horrible.

 

Brilliant.

[tinfoilhat 11]

13 minutes ago, casualbystander said:

same commercial decision that tried to ban POTUS? well well free speech being censored eh? seems some are more free to speak than others eh?

 

Trump was spreading lies, it goes against Twitter t and cs. Hopkins made a career of doing the same.

[Guest makapaka]

5 minutes ago, altus said:

Nobody is stopping either of them speaking.

 

Nobody has an obligation to provide them with a platform. They could easily host their own web site if they wished.

Exactly 

[altus 537]

26 minutes ago, melthebell said:

and?...............

thats a home goal if i ever saw one, the funny thing about this statement is..................................trump has never been banned, or suspended despite what ever falsities he decides to come up with next. if i or you said the things he said we'd be banned and our tweets removed in a heartbeat. He seems to have more freedom of speech than anybody else on the planet.

Someone set up a Twitter account that just copied Trump's tweets. It was banned 68 hours after it was created for violating the site's rules about glorifying violence.

[Baron99 778]

What I can't understand is why people feel the need Katie Hopkins to actually post their joy / despair at her being banned from Twitter.  That means you actually give her some recognition & credence in the first place. 

 

What surprises me is she has 1 million followers.  Well I suppose even if you dispise her on Twitter & retweet her comments, you're still classed as a follower & Twitter can link all these lovely accounts & make money of the back off the residual advertising that is pushed onto Twitter account holders.  More fool the individuals for having Twitter accounts in the first place. 

 

Twitter have certainly lost a cash-cow today.  They'll actually be sorry to get rid of her. 

 

Hopkins, like Owen Jones & Henry Bonsu may be different in their politics but they are all cut from the same mold.  All are nothing nore than self promotors, wheeled out by & fawed over by the media executives & luvvies, when real experts can't be found. 

 

I mean who died & decreed that the likes of the above are qualified enough , in what appears to be every field going, to give authoritive views & pass judgment on others,  as social commentators? 

  

 

 

Edited June 20, 2020 by Baron99

[tinfoilhat 11]

4 minutes ago, Baron99 said:

What I can't understand is why people feel the need Katie Hopkins to actually post their joy / despair at her being banned from Twitter.  That means you actually give her some recognition & credence in the first place. 

 

What surprises me is she has 1 million followers.  Well I suppose even if you dispise her on Twitter & retweet her comments, you're still classed as a follower & Twitter can link all these accounts & make money of the back off the residual advertising that is pushed onto Twitter account holders.  More fool the individuals for having Twitter accounts in the first place. 

 

Twitter have certainly lost a cash-cow today.  They'll actually be sorry to get rid of her. 

 

Hopkins, like Owen Jones & Henry Bonsu may be different in their politics but they are all cut from the same mould.  All are nothing nore than self promotors, wheeled out by & fawed over by the media executives & luvvies, when real experts can't be found. 

 

I mean who died & decreed that the likes of the above are qualified enough , in what appears to be every field going, to give authoritive views & pass judgment on others,  as social commentators? 

  

 

 

I disagree with the first bit - if you follow Hopkins (or anyone) on Twitter, you literally click on a button to follow them. If you don't, you don't.

 

The second half is more or less right. We don't have enough experts, just rentagobs. Why?

[Baron99 778]

21 minutes ago, tinfoilhat said:

I disagree with the first bit - if you follow Hopkins (or anyone) on Twitter, you literally click on a button to follow them. If you don't, you don't.

 

The second half is more or less right. We don't have enough experts, just rentagobs. Why?

I'll concede the Twitter following bit as I've never had an account, (that's now clearly obvious), I don't know how it works. 

 

How people get wound up by the likes of Hopkins is beyond me.  If she lived next door, you'd probably peek out the window before you went out, just to check that there's no chance of bumping into her & having to chat to her. 

 

So why people waste their time & effort in getting worked up about her, responding to her comments, not realising bad publicity is still good publicity for her & it keeps her in the limelight & therefore keeps her money rolling in. 

[Guest makapaka]

3 hours ago, Baron99 said:

I'll concede the Twitter following bit as I've never had an account, (that's now clearly obvious), I don't know how it works. 

 

How people get wound up by the likes of Hopkins is beyond me.  If she lived next door, you'd probably peek out the window before you went out, just to check that there's no chance of bumping into her & having to chat to her. 

 

So why people waste their time & effort in getting worked up about her, responding to her comments, not realising bad publicity is still good publicity for her & it keeps her in the limelight & therefore keeps her money rolling in. 

Because she needed to be challenged about what she was saying.