3 ms·
The "freedom of press" argument is total bull. This is 2016. Free press has already won, 1000 kids could write the same things in 1000 social networks and blogs
by return0 10y ago
The "freedom of press" argument is total bull. This is 2016. Free press has already won, 1000 kids could write the same things in 1000 social networks and blogs. The information is there. But gawker makes money off this. Thats what makes them immorral and they should pay the damages for hurting people. It's not like their copywriters cannot post the same shit on their twitters.
- ebbv 10y agoI'd have a hard time constructing or more ignorant or ass-backwards argument than what you did there. You do not have freedom of speech on Twitter. You are only allowed to say there whatever Twitter allows you to say. The only place on the internet you might have freedom of speech is on your own site that you control. And even then you need to run the server, data center and you need to be sure of your uplink provider.
- return0 10y agothanks. Agree about twitter, it was a figure of speech. You only need enough bandwidth to be found by google or the twittercrowd or the 4chan (yes i know, all of them have their biases, yet there has never been a single cover up in the internet age). Having an uplink to pay does not justify being an asshole.