CDZ Social media has become too big to remain private.... YES or NO?

[Thoth001]

No, they're a Company making a decision not to post kook conspiracy theory bullshit...

Then they're not a platform but, rather, a publisher.

This forum permits people to post all sorts of bizarre views because this forum is a PLATFORM. Twitter, Facebook and YouTube are PUBLISHERS because they censor a plethora opinions.

This forum has rules and can kick people and ban them.

Twitter, facebook and youtube can do the same - and you can also get off your ass, educate yourself, and build your own successful platform if your feelings don't like it.

And if they arbitrarily and unfairly kick and ban people who don't deserve it, based on their stated rules, and it makes it impossible to actually do what the site is designed for, ie have political discussions,


then they are assholes and morally and ethically in the wrong.


If the site were important enough that their misdeeds were a threat to the well being of the society, then society would have the right to respond.

Like private organizations, private social media sites are at liberty to determine who is or is not a member absent justification.

If a private social media platform doesn’t want to have conservatives as members who spread lies, misinformation, and hate speech, then those individuals can be appropriately banned.

It’s idiotic to suggest that private social media platforms should be subject to government regulation because those platforms don’t want hateful, racist, bigoted conservatives as members.

Well, if we are to use your line of thinking. If they keep the censorship up they are going to fall flat on their faces. Many people are leaving in droves from YT and FB and going to platforms that don't censor such as MeWe and Parlor. I don't even consider myself a conservative and I can see how those such as FB and YT and Google spread their agenda and lie and censor people that are actually telling the truth and they are calling the truthtellers the liars.

Everyone knows by now that these so called fact checkers are nothing but BS and only push things that fits the Powers That Be Agenda. Or whatever you want to call the Cabal.

So in the end if these platforms want to keep censoring people they don't agree with or don't like truth being spread they will become a thing of the past. Many new options are coming available on a daily basis. All I do if I go on FB now is make fun of Mark Zuckerberg and see how many times I can get banned.

 

[WinterBorn]

No, they're a Company making a decision not to post kook conspiracy theory bullshit...

Then they're not a platform but, rather, a publisher.

This forum permits people to post all sorts of bizarre views because this forum is a PLATFORM. Twitter, Facebook and YouTube are PUBLISHERS because they censor a plethora opinions.

This forum has rules and can kick people and ban them.

Twitter, facebook and youtube can do the same - and you can also get off your ass, educate yourself, and build your own successful platform if your feelings don't like it.

And if they arbitrarily and unfairly kick and ban people who don't deserve it, based on their stated rules, and it makes it impossible to actually do what the site is designed for, ie have political discussions,


then they are assholes and morally and ethically in the wrong.


If the site were important enough that their misdeeds were a threat to the well being of the society, then society would have the right to respond.

Like private organizations, private social media sites are at liberty to determine who is or is not a member absent justification.

If a private social media platform doesn’t want to have conservatives as members who spread lies, misinformation, and hate speech, then those individuals can be appropriately banned.

It’s idiotic to suggest that private social media platforms should be subject to government regulation because those platforms don’t want hateful, racist, bigoted conservatives as members.

Well, if we are to use your line of thinking. If they keep the censorship up they are going to fall flat on their faces. Many people are leaving in droves from YT and FB and going to platforms that don't censor such as MeWe and Parlor. I don't even consider myself a conservative and I can see how those such as FB and YT and Google spread their agenda and lie and censor people that are actually telling the truth and they are calling the truthtellers the liars.

Everyone knows by now that these so called fact checkers are nothing but BS and only push things that fits the Powers That Be Agenda. Or whatever you want to call the Cabal.

So in the end if these platforms want to keep censoring people they don't agree with or don't like truth being spread they will become a thing of the past. Many new options are coming available on a daily basis. All I do if I go on FB now is make fun of Mark Zuckerberg and see how many times I can get banned.

And THAT is the answer. Start a new social media venue or join a new one. The idea that private property would be co-opted because you don't like them treating like they own it, when they do, is ridiculous.

 

[Thoth001]

No, they're a Company making a decision not to post kook conspiracy theory bullshit...

Then they're not a platform but, rather, a publisher.

This forum permits people to post all sorts of bizarre views because this forum is a PLATFORM. Twitter, Facebook and YouTube are PUBLISHERS because they censor a plethora opinions.

This forum has rules and can kick people and ban them.

Twitter, facebook and youtube can do the same - and you can also get off your ass, educate yourself, and build your own successful platform if your feelings don't like it.

And if they arbitrarily and unfairly kick and ban people who don't deserve it, based on their stated rules, and it makes it impossible to actually do what the site is designed for, ie have political discussions,


then they are assholes and morally and ethically in the wrong.


If the site were important enough that their misdeeds were a threat to the well being of the society, then society would have the right to respond.

Like private organizations, private social media sites are at liberty to determine who is or is not a member absent justification.

If a private social media platform doesn’t want to have conservatives as members who spread lies, misinformation, and hate speech, then those individuals can be appropriately banned.

It’s idiotic to suggest that private social media platforms should be subject to government regulation because those platforms don’t want hateful, racist, bigoted conservatives as members.

Well, if we are to use your line of thinking. If they keep the censorship up they are going to fall flat on their faces. Many people are leaving in droves from YT and FB and going to platforms that don't censor such as MeWe and Parlor. I don't even consider myself a conservative and I can see how those such as FB and YT and Google spread their agenda and lie and censor people that are actually telling the truth and they are calling the truthtellers the liars.

Everyone knows by now that these so called fact checkers are nothing but BS and only push things that fits the Powers That Be Agenda. Or whatever you want to call the Cabal.

So in the end if these platforms want to keep censoring people they don't agree with or don't like truth being spread they will become a thing of the past. Many new options are coming available on a daily basis. All I do if I go on FB now is make fun of Mark Zuckerberg and see how many times I can get banned.

And THAT is the answer. Start a new social media venue or join a new one. The idea that private property would be co-opted because you don't like them treating like they own it, when they do, is ridiculous.

If I am censored in my free speech I will for sure go somewhere else. As many people are now. They are digging their own graves with their tyrannical platforms.

 

[WinterBorn]

No, they're a Company making a decision not to post kook conspiracy theory bullshit...

Then they're not a platform but, rather, a publisher.

This forum permits people to post all sorts of bizarre views because this forum is a PLATFORM. Twitter, Facebook and YouTube are PUBLISHERS because they censor a plethora opinions.

This forum has rules and can kick people and ban them.

Twitter, facebook and youtube can do the same - and you can also get off your ass, educate yourself, and build your own successful platform if your feelings don't like it.

And if they arbitrarily and unfairly kick and ban people who don't deserve it, based on their stated rules, and it makes it impossible to actually do what the site is designed for, ie have political discussions,


then they are assholes and morally and ethically in the wrong.


If the site were important enough that their misdeeds were a threat to the well being of the society, then society would have the right to respond.

Like private organizations, private social media sites are at liberty to determine who is or is not a member absent justification.

If a private social media platform doesn’t want to have conservatives as members who spread lies, misinformation, and hate speech, then those individuals can be appropriately banned.

It’s idiotic to suggest that private social media platforms should be subject to government regulation because those platforms don’t want hateful, racist, bigoted conservatives as members.

Well, if we are to use your line of thinking. If they keep the censorship up they are going to fall flat on their faces. Many people are leaving in droves from YT and FB and going to platforms that don't censor such as MeWe and Parlor. I don't even consider myself a conservative and I can see how those such as FB and YT and Google spread their agenda and lie and censor people that are actually telling the truth and they are calling the truthtellers the liars.

Everyone knows by now that these so called fact checkers are nothing but BS and only push things that fits the Powers That Be Agenda. Or whatever you want to call the Cabal.

So in the end if these platforms want to keep censoring people they don't agree with or don't like truth being spread they will become a thing of the past. Many new options are coming available on a daily basis. All I do if I go on FB now is make fun of Mark Zuckerberg and see how many times I can get banned.

And THAT is the answer. Start a new social media venue or join a new one. The idea that private property would be co-opted because you don't like them treating like they own it, when they do, is ridiculous.

If I am censored in my free speech I will for sure go somewhere else. As many people are now. They are digging their own graves with their tyrannical platforms.

The overwhelming majority of posts on FaceBook are not political. I start my day on FB because I can have some laughter with my coffee. I can keep up with my grown children and grandbabies to warm my heart. And see old friends without leaving the house. Those are what FB is all about. The hostile politics is just bullshit.

 

[Gracie]

I'm going to post and I'm not on social media

You are social media right here, right now. Any chitchatting on the internet in a group is social media.

 

[Thoth001]

No, they're a Company making a decision not to post kook conspiracy theory bullshit...

Then they're not a platform but, rather, a publisher.

This forum permits people to post all sorts of bizarre views because this forum is a PLATFORM. Twitter, Facebook and YouTube are PUBLISHERS because they censor a plethora opinions.

This forum has rules and can kick people and ban them.

Twitter, facebook and youtube can do the same - and you can also get off your ass, educate yourself, and build your own successful platform if your feelings don't like it.

And if they arbitrarily and unfairly kick and ban people who don't deserve it, based on their stated rules, and it makes it impossible to actually do what the site is designed for, ie have political discussions,


then they are assholes and morally and ethically in the wrong.


If the site were important enough that their misdeeds were a threat to the well being of the society, then society would have the right to respond.

Like private organizations, private social media sites are at liberty to determine who is or is not a member absent justification.

If a private social media platform doesn’t want to have conservatives as members who spread lies, misinformation, and hate speech, then those individuals can be appropriately banned.

It’s idiotic to suggest that private social media platforms should be subject to government regulation because those platforms don’t want hateful, racist, bigoted conservatives as members.

Well, if we are to use your line of thinking. If they keep the censorship up they are going to fall flat on their faces. Many people are leaving in droves from YT and FB and going to platforms that don't censor such as MeWe and Parlor. I don't even consider myself a conservative and I can see how those such as FB and YT and Google spread their agenda and lie and censor people that are actually telling the truth and they are calling the truthtellers the liars.

Everyone knows by now that these so called fact checkers are nothing but BS and only push things that fits the Powers That Be Agenda. Or whatever you want to call the Cabal.

So in the end if these platforms want to keep censoring people they don't agree with or don't like truth being spread they will become a thing of the past. Many new options are coming available on a daily basis. All I do if I go on FB now is make fun of Mark Zuckerberg and see how many times I can get banned.

And THAT is the answer. Start a new social media venue or join a new one. The idea that private property would be co-opted because you don't like them treating like they own it, when they do, is ridiculous.

If I am censored in my free speech I will for sure go somewhere else. As many people are now. They are digging their own graves with their tyrannical platforms.

The overwhelming majority of posts on FaceBook are not political. I start my day on FB because I can have some laughter with my coffee. I can keep up with my grown children and grandbabies to warm my heart. And see old friends without leaving the house. Those are what FB is all about. The hostile politics is just bullshit.

It depends what kind of friends you have on there also and the algorithms. I am always hungry for truth so I get kind of bored just looking at pictures that friends post although it is nice to see them sometimes also.

 

[WinterBorn]

No, they're a Company making a decision not to post kook conspiracy theory bullshit...

Then they're not a platform but, rather, a publisher.

This forum permits people to post all sorts of bizarre views because this forum is a PLATFORM. Twitter, Facebook and YouTube are PUBLISHERS because they censor a plethora opinions.

This forum has rules and can kick people and ban them.

Twitter, facebook and youtube can do the same - and you can also get off your ass, educate yourself, and build your own successful platform if your feelings don't like it.

And if they arbitrarily and unfairly kick and ban people who don't deserve it, based on their stated rules, and it makes it impossible to actually do what the site is designed for, ie have political discussions,


then they are assholes and morally and ethically in the wrong.


If the site were important enough that their misdeeds were a threat to the well being of the society, then society would have the right to respond.

Like private organizations, private social media sites are at liberty to determine who is or is not a member absent justification.

If a private social media platform doesn’t want to have conservatives as members who spread lies, misinformation, and hate speech, then those individuals can be appropriately banned.

It’s idiotic to suggest that private social media platforms should be subject to government regulation because those platforms don’t want hateful, racist, bigoted conservatives as members.

Well, if we are to use your line of thinking. If they keep the censorship up they are going to fall flat on their faces. Many people are leaving in droves from YT and FB and going to platforms that don't censor such as MeWe and Parlor. I don't even consider myself a conservative and I can see how those such as FB and YT and Google spread their agenda and lie and censor people that are actually telling the truth and they are calling the truthtellers the liars.

Everyone knows by now that these so called fact checkers are nothing but BS and only push things that fits the Powers That Be Agenda. Or whatever you want to call the Cabal.

So in the end if these platforms want to keep censoring people they don't agree with or don't like truth being spread they will become a thing of the past. Many new options are coming available on a daily basis. All I do if I go on FB now is make fun of Mark Zuckerberg and see how many times I can get banned.

And THAT is the answer. Start a new social media venue or join a new one. The idea that private property would be co-opted because you don't like them treating like they own it, when they do, is ridiculous.

If I am censored in my free speech I will for sure go somewhere else. As many people are now. They are digging their own graves with their tyrannical platforms.

The overwhelming majority of posts on FaceBook are not political. I start my day on FB because I can have some laughter with my coffee. I can keep up with my grown children and grandbabies to warm my heart. And see old friends without leaving the house. Those are what FB is all about. The hostile politics is just bullshit.

It depends what kind of friends you have on there also and the algorithms. I am always hungry for truth so I get kind of bored just looking at pictures that friends post although it is nice to see them sometimes also.

The internet is vast. Find your truth elsewhere and just enjoy social media for what it is.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

No, they're a Company making a decision not to post kook conspiracy theory bullshit...

Then they're not a platform but, rather, a publisher.

This forum permits people to post all sorts of bizarre views because this forum is a PLATFORM. Twitter, Facebook and YouTube are PUBLISHERS because they censor a plethora opinions.

This forum has rules and can kick people and ban them.

Twitter, facebook and youtube can do the same - and you can also get off your ass, educate yourself, and build your own successful platform if your feelings don't like it.

And if they arbitrarily and unfairly kick and ban people who don't deserve it, based on their stated rules, and it makes it impossible to actually do what the site is designed for, ie have political discussions,


then they are assholes and morally and ethically in the wrong.


If the site were important enough that their misdeeds were a threat to the well being of the society, then society would have the right to respond.

Like private organizations, private social media sites are at liberty to determine who is or is not a member absent justification.

If a private social media platform doesn’t want to have conservatives as members who spread lies, misinformation, and hate speech, then those individuals can be appropriately banned.

It’s idiotic to suggest that private social media platforms should be subject to government regulation because those platforms don’t want hateful, racist, bigoted conservatives as members.

Well, if we are to use your line of thinking. If they keep the censorship up they are going to fall flat on their faces. Many people are leaving in droves from YT and FB and going to platforms that don't censor such as MeWe and Parlor. I don't even consider myself a conservative and I can see how those such as FB and YT and Google spread their agenda and lie and censor people that are actually telling the truth and they are calling the truthtellers the liars.

Everyone knows by now that these so called fact checkers are nothing but BS and only push things that fits the Powers That Be Agenda. Or whatever you want to call the Cabal.

So in the end if these platforms want to keep censoring people they don't agree with or don't like truth being spread they will become a thing of the past. Many new options are coming available on a daily basis. All I do if I go on FB now is make fun of Mark Zuckerberg and see how many times I can get banned.

And THAT is the answer. Start a new social media venue or join a new one. The idea that private property would be co-opted because you don't like them treating like they own it, when they do, is ridiculous.

If I am censored in my free speech I will for sure go somewhere else. As many people are now. They are digging their own graves with their tyrannical platforms.

Again, the doctrine of free speech concerns solely the relationship between government and those governed, not between or among private persons or private organizations, such as social media platforms and their subscribers.

There’s nothing ‘tyrannical’ about how social media platforms edit their content.

That as a rightist you’re unhappy with how conservative hate speech is being edited isn’t justification to subject social media platforms to government regulation.

 

[Blues Man]

Privacy has never been a legal firewall preventing the Gov't from regulating business.
Crony oligarchs should be regulated when it comes to censorship in mass communication businesses.

Is a messaging platform a mass communication business?

If the only content is what people who sign up to use the free service post then IMO it is not any different than a bunch of people sitting in a room shooting the shit

No. Because everyone can access it.

yes because everyone can access it. It's the equivalent of one big room provided by a third party where anyone can enter.

 

[Gdjjr]

You are social media right here, right now. Any chitchatting on the internet in a group is social media.

Okay- I don't do what's referred to as- how's that?

 

[Gdjjr]

There’s nothing ‘tyrannical’ about how social media platforms edit their content.

It is tyrannical- one entity forcing its will on others is tyrannical- it doesn't have to a gov't- the gov't isn't allowed to, allegedly, per the rules for it- private enterprise can, per the rules for it.

 

[Gdjjr]

How are algorithms created?
To write a computer program, you have to tell the computer, step by step, exactly what you want it to do. The computer then 'executes' the program, following each step mechanically, to accomplish the end goal. ... That's where computer algorithms come in. The algorithm is the basic technique used to get the job done.”


Garbage in, garbage out = artificial intelligence- parameters are determined by bias. Bias is, by definition, subjective, to accomplish an objective.

From what little I've seen, "social media" can be used to keep up with someone you are interested in- I read twitter posts and face book posts to keep up with someone I don't talk to regularly but am acquainted with- I read only- what I see is a lot of ads and some information- I suppose that's because the ones I read are semi-famous-

 

[Correll]

It's funny how leftists complain about big corporations and "corporate welfare" while simultaneously supporting big tech's special, legal privilege that is denied to smaller companies.

They have no principles and no concern for even themselves, so they don't mind looking like retarded hypocrites.

 

[Correll]

I feel kind of bad for Boomers...in a sense, they were Programmed with hatred for the last 30 years. DAY IN, DAY OUT being told that 'they're out to get us,' 'we're being wronged,' in some way. That's terrible. If it isn't Democrats want to grab your guns and kill your babies, it's Democrats are evil nafarious deep Staters who are here to rule the world and anyone even in our own party that calls us crazy or laughs us out of court is in on it...to democrats are going to explode the debt until we're bankrupt but we go silent when Republicans do it...Dems are anti big-business, except when big business supports a Dem candidate then now our team can be anti big business because MAGIC...to Democrats hate the troops if they don't support the perpetual mid-east wars...to now WE'RE the anti perpetual mid-east war team, because Magic...to they stole the election...to they won't let us say what we want to say on the free platforms they kindly provided for us. Democrats want to OVER REGULATE!! But now since we're a victim about that, too...we'd like our regulations just fine, thanks.

It's just a DECADES long campaign against their mental health and I do kind of feel bad for them. Always told to hate something, always told how they're the victim in some way. eww

Dude. Tens of millions of "boomers" are on your side. They are not a bloc.


All you did there, was talk shit about people, based on you being an asshole and not wanting to have to actually defend your position with a reasonable and credibly supporting argument.

 

[Correll]

These companies are supposed to just providing a platform. If they are taking sides, and they are, then they are responsible for their content and should be liable for it.

That they mislead people and fuck up people's lives, and indeed suppress political speech for partisan purposes, COUNTER to their stated purpose or their responsibilities to their share holders,

Makes regulating them a valid issue.

If this argument were raised outside the context of political retribution, I might have more patience with it. But it's not. It's purely Trump "going after" social media companies that won't do his bidding. We should never tolerate that kind of government.

Your rationalization for supporting censorship is noted.

Note whatever you like. I totally support censorship, as long it's not mandated by the state. Twitter and FB's main mistake was in making exceptions for him in the first place. They should have banned him like any other troll and wiped their hands of the whole thing. Instead they placated him, and his followers, because they like all the traffic. For that reason, I don't feel particularly sorry for them being in the crosshairs. But I don't want to see the state dictating to media. Period.

FUnny how so many of the super rich are actually hard core lefties, and use their power to advance the lefty agenda.


It is almost like the class warfare rhetoric of the Left is, like so much of what that have to say, complete bs.


i bet if it were RIGHT LEANING tech companies censoring huge portions of the information that people get, your opinion would be very different.

You mean like Fox News?

Don't you realize that if we give government power over social media, the Democrats will run hog wild with it???

The dems have never waited for us to run wild. They did not need anything from us to use Big Tech, or to politicize the media, or to use violent mobs in the streets.

The issue is real. That dealing with it will be hard, or even not possible, does not mean that the issue is not real.

Businesses, big and small, have a right to their political biases - just like people. They have a right to pick and choose who they cater to and who they snub. They have a right to disagree with the government, and to say so. Despite the claims of socialists and Trump Republicans, they are not "owned" by the state. They are not "public utilities".

The issue here is that FB and Twitter have defied the President and you want to punish them for it. Government shouldn't work that way. A free society doesn't work that way.

If they do that, they are not providing a platform for publishers, but BEING a publisher.


And violating their own stated terms of service with their content creators. Often causing them serious hardship.


AND, if they are harming society with their shitty actions, society has a right to respond.

 

[Blues Man]

There’s nothing ‘tyrannical’ about how social media platforms edit their content.

It is tyrannical- one entity forcing its will on others is tyrannical- it doesn't have to a gov't- the gov't isn't allowed to, allegedly, per the rules for it- private enterprise can, per the rules for it.

You agree to the terms when you sign up for the FREE service so by definition it is not tyranny

And you do not have to use social media if you don't like the way they work

 

[Correll]

These are memes pertaining to the argument within the OP. The underlying issue here, as has always been, is the Victim mentality and the fear-based, irrational/conspiratorial thinking:

View attachment 424574

View attachment 424575

View attachment 424576

YOur argument has been that BIg Tech has the RIGHT to kick anyone off their sites for whatever reason they want.


If they do that, then the people they kick off for no reason, people who often suffer serious financial loss because of it, are indeed, victims.


It is one thing to argue, even dishonestly, a hard core Private Property argument in favor of their actions.


It is another to argue in favor of their right to victimize anyone they want, AND THEN TO RIDICULE their victims for even complaining about it.


Indeed, some of your memes even seen to hint that you might be denying the discrimination is happening, after arguing in defense of the discrimination for dozens of posts.


I take it this is the part of the discussion, where the lib realizes he has lost and just starts throwing shit against the wall, hoping something sticks or at least, if he generations enough noise that it might distract from how badly he failed to support his position.

So, to sum up - "bake the cake"?

To wit:

"Your argument has been that the baker has the RIGHT to refuse service for whatever reason they want.

If they do that, then the people they refuse to serve because of their sexual orientation, people who often suffer serious financial loss because of it, are indeed, victims.

It is one thing to argue, even dishonestly, a hard core Private Property argument in favor of their actions.

It is another to argue in favor of their right to victimize anyone they want, AND THEN TO RIDICULE their victims for even complaining about it.

Indeed, some of your memes even seen to hint that you might be denying the discrimination is happening, after arguing in defense of the discrimination for dozens of posts.

I take it this is the part of the discussion, where the con realizes he has lost and just starts throwing shit against the wall, hoping something sticks or at least, if he generations enough noise that it might distract from how badly he failed to support his position."

Same shit, different hypocritical party. I know, I know - it's different when you do it.

Except here, the "bakery" said, sure we will bake that cake, pay in advance, set up your wedding and invite your guests" and then when you have set up to depend on them, with hundreds of guests coming, (or hundreds of thousands of subscribers)

and you show up on the big day, to get your cake, and they are like,


"Dude. You violated our terms of service, fuck off, no cake for you".


That is putting a real hardship on people and negatively impacting the community.


For you to dismiss such valid complaints as "Whining" is just you being an uncaring asshole and a supporting of discrimination and censorship.

 

[Correll]

Given that internet access is no longer an option but a necessity....does it not follow that like electricity and access to fuel oils and gasses....social media has no become an need instead of a choice or a luxury? I for one am not in favor of government controlling anything.....but in the case of real necessities like heat and lights somebody has to oversee the process lest we get scalpers who deny access except for usurious payment.....likewise with the internet and social media.....Dominion has demonstrated that any politician who wants to win an election need only pay them for it. Is it time for a governing regulator specifically for the internet and social media as well?

What do you say?

I do think the big tech giants should be able to be sued if they censor you. You better believe they will be more careful in who they censor if they can be sued for it.

I am curious what you think the basis for the lawsuit would be?

If you are posting information and they censor your information as long as it's not inciting violence. There should be a way to sue them if they are taking away your free speech.

No one is taking away your free speech. The 1st amendment does not give you rights to private property. It protects you from being silenced by the gov't.

These companies are supposed to just providing a platform. If they are taking sides, and they are, then they are responsible for their content and should be liable for it.

That they mislead people and fuck up people's lives, and indeed suppress political speech for partisan purposes, COUNTER to their stated purpose or their responsibilities to their share holders,

Makes regulating them a valid issue.

Nonsense.

This is as ignorant as it is ridiculous and wrong.

Private media entities are at liberty to edit their content as they see fit; there is no ‘suppression’ of political speech.

Only government has the potential to suppress speech using its authority to enact and enforce measures to preempt free expression – the purpose of First Amendment case law is to prohibit government from doing so, or to otherwise allow government to lawfully preempt speech as authorized by that case law.

The First Amendment doesn’t apply to private social media platforms.

Subjecting private social media platforms to government regulation is unwarranted and un-Constitutional.

It’s perfectly appropriate for social media platforms to prohibit rightwing hate speech.

1. My understanding of the law is that their position is that they are just providing a service to content creators, and thus are not held responsible for the content on their platform. If they are taking sides they are taking responsibility for the content as they take control.

2. Any force that prevents the free flow of information and discussion, so that we can have PRODUCTIVE POLICY DEBATES ON THE ISSUES OF THE DAY, is a problem for society, whether it is government based or not.

3. IF you were serious about your position, you would not have had to support it, with the lie that they are just "prohibiting hate speech". That was a "tell" that you are lying.

4. If I show them censoring something that is not "hate speech", will you admit that you are wrong? Or just stone wall, thus showing that you have no respect for your own words and ideas? That they are just shit you throw against the wall to see if anything sticks?

 

[Correll]

No one is taking away your free speech. The 1st amendment does not give you rights to private property. It protects you from being silenced by the gov't.

Yes sir. I do support removing their (Twitter, Facebook, YouTube) special legal protections for which true platforms are eligible as they are certainly publishers and NOT unbiased platforms. This forum is a platform, for example.

They are not publishers. They allow users to publish.

When they censor one side, and favor another, they are publishers.

Because the side being subject to appropriate editing is conservatives engaging in hate speech, in addition to reckless, irresponsible conspiracy theories.

If you as a rightist don’t like it, don’t participate.

Indeed, the internet is infinite, there’s ample opportunity for conservatives to propagate their lies, misinformation, and hate speech absent FB or Twitter.

That you have to call speech you don't like, silly names, makes your argument silly.

 

[Correll]

No, they're a Company making a decision not to post kook conspiracy theory bullshit...

Then they're not a platform but, rather, a publisher.

This forum permits people to post all sorts of bizarre views because this forum is a PLATFORM. Twitter, Facebook and YouTube are PUBLISHERS because they censor a plethora opinions.

This forum has rules and can kick people and ban them.

Twitter, facebook and youtube can do the same - and you can also get off your ass, educate yourself, and build your own successful platform if your feelings don't like it.

And if they arbitrarily and unfairly kick and ban people who don't deserve it, based on their stated rules, and it makes it impossible to actually do what the site is designed for, ie have political discussions,


then they are assholes and morally and ethically in the wrong.


If the site were important enough that their misdeeds were a threat to the well being of the society, then society would have the right to respond.

Like private organizations, private social media sites are at liberty to determine who is or is not a member absent justification.

If a private social media platform doesn’t want to have conservatives as members who spread lies, misinformation, and hate speech, then those individuals can be appropriately banned.

It’s idiotic to suggest that private social media platforms should be subject to government regulation because those platforms don’t want hateful, racist, bigoted conservatives as members.

I made a point about how bad behavior from a site (as an analogy for Big Tech) could be wrong and hurt society.


Your response to that was to claim that they have the right to do what they want and to call people names.


That is you admitting that you know that my point about the behavior of Big Tech is wrong and is hurting society,


BUT, since it helps your political agenda, you support it.


Time to regulate Big Tech.