Supreme justice suggests treating Twitter and Facebook as utilities so they can be regulated

[surada]

Excellent.

In a concurring opinion Monday, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas said social-media companies have too much power over public speech, suggesting they be treated as utilities so they can be regulated by the government.

Clarence Thomas pushes new way to deal with social giants

FB's quest to be the top social media platform with the most users wasn't enough it would seem.

I don't use Facebook, but when it first came out I was a member (I first said I was a user but that didn't quite sound right). Even though I don't like it and don't use it, a company (regardless of size) still has a right to make statements, including political ones. Corporate heads who choose to play politics (like Coca-Cola's actions), should always expect a negative reaction by the political opposition.

When freedom of speech is fairly protected, all speech outside of illegal hate speech is protected. These corporate heads take a small risk every time getting into the political circus to lose business, and rightfully so as voters have the right to boycott.

The US government is large enough and soon to be much larger with current federal efforts to add more layers of oversight. Government needs to let consumers decide the fate of businesses, products, and policy...that would be government policy.

The big Atlanta companies think voting is sacred and no US citizen should be excluded.. Obviously you think differently.

There is no reason an adult living in the US has an issue getting an ID, if that's the issue to which you're referring. I read your two sentence post over and over...still don't get the connection you're making to my post with the changes made by Georgia's law. Care to elaborate? EDIT=to clarify-there should be no reason it's an issue to obtain an ID in any state because people have months and months to get one if not years prior to next national election. That argument just doesn't hold up.

They have closed several DMZs in Atlanta... Its a very big deal to trek out to Alpharetta (now you have to make an appointment) Especially for seniors or people who don't have transportation. The GOP is simply trying to exclude voters. This isn't subtle.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Excellent.

In a concurring opinion Monday, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas said social-media companies have too much power over public speech, suggesting they be treated as utilities so they can be regulated by the government.

Clarence Thomas pushes new way to deal with social giants

Excellent?? Are you pushing for government regulation?! I thought you were more conservative minded

I am a classical liberal (for the 487,923rd time here) in the manner of the Founding Fathers. No connection with the modern definition. No connection with any political organizations whatsoever.

I support those who agree most with my positions.

I am not pushing for government regulation. I am looking for these industries to be defined, as all industries have definition, and to be held to the same standards as all other industries so defined.

Public accommodations and all that stuff.

 

[MarcATL]

Are you LeBron, or Dave?

Well, that depends...are you Token Thomas?

 

[MarcATL]

Um, yes, obviously. Youre comparing a comedian and a fucking basketball player to a SCJ?

If you far rightwing bitch-asses want to compare regular citizens to a Supreme Court judge, what's the damn difference dunce?

 

[dblack]

I am not pushing for government regulation. I am looking for these industries to be defined, as all industries have definition, and to be held to the same standards as all other industries so defined.

LOL - but that's not regulation.

Public accommodations and all that stuff.

Exactly. "Public accommodations" is liberal hogwash. A thinly veiled attempt to establish government as part owner of businesses. Fuck that.

 

[Godboy]

Um, yes, obviously. Youre comparing a comedian and a fucking basketball player to a SCJ?

If you far rightwing bitch-asses want to compare regular citizens to a Supreme Court judge, what's the damn difference dunce?

Im pointing out that YOU, a regular citizen, keeps calling highly intelligent and successful black men tokens.

 

[Slade3200]

Excellent.

In a concurring opinion Monday, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas said social-media companies have too much power over public speech, suggesting they be treated as utilities so they can be regulated by the government.

Clarence Thomas pushes new way to deal with social giants

Excellent?? Are you pushing for government regulation?! I thought you were more conservative minded

I am a classical liberal (for the 487,923rd time here) in the manner of the Founding Fathers. No connection with the modern definition. No connection with any political organizations whatsoever.

I support those who agree most with my positions.

I am not pushing for government regulation. I am looking for these industries to be defined, as all industries have definition, and to be held to the same standards as all other industries so defined.

Public accommodations and all that stuff.

That’s fair. So how do you want companies like Facebook to be defined and regulated?

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Thomas is wrong, of course.

This opinion illustrates why Thomas is not fit to serve on the Supreme Court, that he would buy into the lie that social media are ‘hostile’ toward conservatives.

Such is the authoritarian right.

Thank you for your elegant justification of what is an ignorant authoritarian position.
Who would think social media is hostile towards conservatives views? Probably all the people who have been banned and shut down would.
But never mind....blather on.

 

[MarcATL]

Im pointing out that YOU, a regular citizen, keeps calling highly intelligent and successful black men tokens.

I tell it like it T.I.Z.

#SorryNotSorry

 

[surada]

Thomas is wrong, of course.

This opinion illustrates why Thomas is not fit to serve on the Supreme Court, that he would buy into the lie that social media are ‘hostile’ toward conservatives.

Such is the authoritarian right.

Thank you for your elegant justification of what is an ignorant authoritarian position.
Who would think social media is hostile towards conservatives views? Probably all the people who have been banned and and shut down would.
But never mind....blather on.

Why don't you start your own social media?

 

[2aguy]

Thomas is wrong, of course.

This opinion illustrates why Thomas is not fit to serve on the Supreme Court, that he would buy into the lie that social media are ‘hostile’ toward conservatives.

Such is the authoritarian right.

He is exactly right.....they can be either a platform like a phone, or a publisher, they can't be both and be protected as if they were both.

If they are a platform, they can't edit...

If they are a publisher, and they edit, they can then be sued for what they allowed on their sites....

Those are the two choices...

Why can’t they be a platform and still have rules about what content is allowed or not? Do you think they should permit porn and violence and let the trolls take over like dark web social sites have done?

The problem is if they are allowed the protections of a platform, and yet they edit content, they are protected from libel and slander laws...unfairly...no other entity has both protections......

Magazines and newspapers can edit but they are responsible and can be sued....

The phone company can't edit, and can't be sued....

One or the other, not both...that is the issue.

 

[busybee01]

Excellent.

In a concurring opinion Monday, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas said social-media companies have too much power over public speech, suggesting they be treated as utilities so they can be regulated by the government.

Clarence Thomas pushes new way to deal with social giants

Clarence Thomas is a good little Nazi and a liar to boot. Start your own social media company instead of stealing someone else's. There is nothing to stop you from doing that.

 

[Darkwind]

Token has spoken.

Ah, how cute. Look at the racist.

 

[busybee01]

Thomas is wrong, of course.

This opinion illustrates why Thomas is not fit to serve on the Supreme Court, that he would buy into the lie that social media are ‘hostile’ toward conservatives.

Such is the authoritarian right.

He is exactly right.....they can be either a platform like a phone, or a publisher, they can't be both and be protected as if they were both.

If they are a platform, they can't edit...

If they are a publisher, and they edit, they can then be sued for what they allowed on their sites....

Those are the two choices...

Yes they can. The US Mail can prevent people from using their services in a certain way. They are4 not a publisher because publishing companies make deals with writers to publish their writings.

 

[busybee01]

Excellent.

In a concurring opinion Monday, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas said social-media companies have too much power over public speech, suggesting they be treated as utilities so they can be regulated by the government.

Clarence Thomas pushes new way to deal with social giants

Only question is which will occur first. Government reigning them in or the citizens taking matters into their own hands.

Citizens can start their own company if they object. If they want to do more then you terrorists need to be arrested and jailed.

 

[busybee01]

Token has spoken.

Ah, how cute. Look at the racist.

You clearly are a racist.

 

[busybee01]

Liberalism is support of individual liberty and small govt.

Oh yeah you know that FDR...totally a proponent of small government.

FDR put Americans in camps because they looked different.

You guys sure do pick some fucked-up heroes.

FDR was a Socialist

Yes. A leftist. Just like today's Democrats.

Just like anyone who would suggest nationalizing media as a "utility".

No need for that. They're publishers. Treat them as such.

Publishers pay authors for publishing their writings. Social media companies do not.

 

[busybee01]

Liberalism is support of individual liberty and small govt.

Oh yeah you know that FDR...totally a proponent of small government.

FDR put Americans in camps because they looked different.

You guys sure do pick some fucked-up heroes.

FDR was a Socialist

Yes. A leftist. Just like today's Democrats.

Just like anyone who would suggest nationalizing media as a "utility".

No need for that. They're publishers. Treat them as such.

Aren't they called social platforms, and have been for years? The problem has been identified by other posters- a platform does not have the right to act as a publisher and edit. Or has the definition of "social platform" evolved now? Maybe I've missed something.

Yes they do. They have every right to purge false information from their pages.

 

[busybee01]

Thomas is wrong, of course.

This opinion illustrates why Thomas is not fit to serve on the Supreme Court, that he would buy into the lie that social media are ‘hostile’ toward conservatives.

Such is the authoritarian right.

Thomas is correct that they have too much power and should be regulated

Thomas is a Nazi. They should not be regulated.

 

[busybee01]

Excellent.

In a concurring opinion Monday, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas said social-media companies have too much power over public speech, suggesting they be treated as utilities so they can be regulated by the government.

Clarence Thomas pushes new way to deal with social giants

Excellent?? Are you pushing for government regulation?! I thought you were more conservative minded

I am a classical liberal (for the 487,923rd time here) in the manner of the Founding Fathers. No connection with the modern definition. No connection with any political organizations whatsoever.

I support those who agree most with my positions.

I am not pushing for government regulation. I am looking for these industries to be defined, as all industries have definition, and to be held to the same standards as all other industries so defined.

Public accommodations and all that stuff.

They are not a public accomodation.