Comments by "Plato\x27s Cave alum" (@platoscavealum902) on "Democracy Now!" channel.

@mickeywood3012 : "Do they sell shares on the NASDAQ? If they do, they're not private." ⬆️ WRONG A business can definitely be a "private enterprise" — and be "publicly traded" at the same time, as per Wikipedia: In most cases, public companies are private enterprises in the private sector, and "public" emphasizes their reporting and trading on the public markets. — source: Wikipedia: Public Company I know it’s confusing, but the word "public," in the case of a publicly traded company — doesn’t colloquially mean: "public" — how you would normally understand that word in everyday use. In the case of a "publicly traded company" (whether traded on NASDAQ or elsewhere) — "public" simply refers to the fact that — any person, out in the public — can buy shares of the company. A "publicly traded company" is still a "private enterprise" — it’s just that it’s not necessarily designed to benefit the public, like a "public park" would, for example. (Moreover, "publicly traded companies" are required, by law, to disclose their finances at regular intervals (quarterly and annually) — so that the public can have a lot of information to help them decide if they want to invest in a particular, publicly traded company. In contrast, private companies — that are not publicly traded on an exchange like the NASDAQ — are not required to publicly disclose their finances to the public.) I see a lot of confusion about this all the time. I hope this helps you understand the deeper meaning behind the phrase "publicly" traded. Mickey, thank you for your valuable time.
3
@mickeywood3012 , RT is very much available on their own website for anyone really, really interested. (It’s not a ban — it’s a 'special operation' designed to 'improve' RT.) ⬅️ sarcasm On a more serious note, it is illegal for a Russian TV anchor to refer to current war as "war." With such crucial restrictions placed on reporters’ words, how can anyone trust the Russian media? If people want to hear how this is not a war, they can go to RT website, watch and listen as much as they want. Being on YouTube is a privilege — not a right. Being on the internet is much closer to a right — and RT is easily available on the internet. In other words, RT is not banned, it just doesn’t have as much prestige. I don’t see a problem with that. We’re not banning RT propaganda — we’re simply not promoting it.
2
👍 @mickeywood3012 , I’m glad you found my explanation useful.
2
RT is very much available on their own website for anyone really, really interested. (It’s not a ban — it’s a 'special operation' designed to 'improve' RT.) ⬅️ sarcasm On a more serious note, it is illegal for a Russian TV anchor to refer to current war as "war." With such crucial restrictions placed on reporters’ words, how can anyone trust the Russian media? If people want to hear how this is not a war, they can go to RT website, watch and listen as much as they want. Being on YouTube is a privilege — not a right. Being on the internet is much closer to a right — and RT is easily available on the internet. In other words, RT is not banned, it just doesn’t have as much prestige. I don’t see a problem with that. We’re not banning RT propaganda — we’re simply not promoting it.
2