[DerpyBaby123]

>ban ads for firearms

Source? That sounds like a law to regulate advertisements, not a deplatforming

>Google and Facebook already ban that as well

This is irrelevant - these are not Democratic organizations, and they do not have Democratic policies. Are you somehow implying Google and Facebook are run by Democrats, and so supposedly Hulu is run by Republicans?

[anamax]

> Are you somehow implying Google and Facebook are run by Democrats

Are you suggesting that they aren't?

> and so supposedly Hulu is run by Republicans?

That doesn't actually follow.

[randrews]

Pretty predictable responses.

> Are you somehow implying Google and Facebook are run by Democrats

Again, there was a White House office made specifically to coordinate these platforms banning "disinformation" content. It was later shut down, but its creation in the first place shows that the Democratic party wants to censor discussion it doesn't like. Or are you somehow implying the White House is not run by Democrats?

> That sounds like a law to regulate advertisements, not a deplatforming

Which is exactly what we're talking about here: these are advertisements, Hulu doesn't want them on their platform. You're fine with Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, banning advertisements from gun manufacturers and retailers, presumably pro-gun, but you have a problem with Hulu not wanting advertisements that are anti-gun.

[DerpyBaby123]

>Or are you somehow implying the White House is not run by Democrats?

Of course not, this is obvious?

>You're fine with Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, banning advertisements from gun manufacturers and retailers, presumably pro-gun, but you have a problem with Hulu not wanting advertisements that are anti-gun.

I may or may not be fine with either of those things, why do you assert something you don't know?

So far you've demonstrated an inability to source the information in your original claim, "this sort of deplatforming hadn't been part of [Democrat's] playbook for years."

[randrews]

I really don't think you're arguing in good faith here. This is a very common tactic for people of your political alignment, at least on HN: to nitpickily demand sources for completely obvious facts, and then if provided, shift the argument to discrediting those sources instead of engaging with the actual philosophical points being made.

I could probably write everything else you're going to say in this thread myself, so, I'm not going to bother continuing to argue with you. If you'd like to respond to the core point, which is why are Democrats justified in complaining about their own ads being refused while they celebrate Republican content being deplatformed, then we can continue.