I find it ironic and quite fitting that there are some, including in media are saying that banning Tik Tok is a violation of 1st Amendment rights.

[shockedcanadian]

Yet, they had no qualms with banning Trump on Twitter or silencing anyone opposed to vaccines or restrictions. They have no problem demanding the removal of conservative speakers at schools or Jewish comedians.

When people become easily influenced zombies without principle all of society pays a price.

 

[jotathought]

Yet, they had no qualms with banning Trump on Twitter or silencing anyone opposed to vaccines or restrictions. They have no problem demanding the removal of conservative speakers at schools or Jewish comedians.

When people become easily influenced zombies without principle all of society pays a price.

Banning a social media platform is a violation of 1st amendment rights -- a right which is not absolute?

 

[shockedcanadian]

Banning a social media platform is a violation of 1st amendment rights -- a right which is not absolute?

​

The same media told you that your First Amendment didn't matter when Twitter was run by a twit.

​

There’s a Problem With Banning TikTok. It’s Called the First Amendment.​

Opinion | There’s a Problem With Banning TikTok. It’s Called the First Amendment.

American users of the social media platform are indisputably exercising their constitutional rights when they post and consume content on the site.

www.nytimes.com

 

[jotathought]

​

The same media told you that your First Amendment didn't matter when Twitter was run by a twit.

​

There’s a Problem With Banning TikTok. It’s Called the First Amendment.​

Opinion | There’s a Problem With Banning TikTok. It’s Called the First Amendment.

American users of the social media platform are indisputably exercising their constitutional rights when they post and consume content on the site.

www.nytimes.com

Yeah .. I can't remember that previous CEOs name .. Jack Dorsey?

 

[pknopp]

Yet, they had no qualms with banning Trump on Twitter or silencing anyone opposed to vaccines or restrictions. They have no problem demanding the removal of conservative speakers at schools or Jewish comedians.

When people become easily influenced zombies without principle all of society pays a price.

One being the government banning something and one being a website banning something.

You don't understand the difference?

 

[shockedcanadian]

One being the government banning something and one being a website banning something.

You don't understand the difference?

In the year 2024, no, there is no difference as these are near monopolies.

If your local service company has a monopoly and they determine you can't have a cell phone or cannot discuss certain issues would you be happy?

 

[Magnus]

Yet, they had no qualms with banning Trump on Twitter or silencing anyone opposed to vaccines or restrictions. They have no problem demanding the removal of conservative speakers at schools or Jewish comedians.

When people become easily influenced zombies without principle all of society pays a price.

So, no one gets banned on Truth Social?

 

[pknopp]

In the year 2024, no, there is no difference as these are near monopolies.

Maybe not in Canada. Perhaps you need to stick to arguing that.

If your local service company has a monopoly and they determine you can't have a cell phone or cannot discuss certain issues would you be happy?

No idea what you are rambling about.