4 ms·

Only thing a company owes you is what is in your contact and vice versa. I don't understand what people don't get about this. If you criticize the government an

Only thing a company owes you is what is in your contact and vice versa. I don't understand what people don't get about this. If you criticize the government and get thrown in jail, that's a violation of free speech. But If you complain about your employer then they can fire you. If you don't like your employer, you can leave. That's how it works. End of story. The guy is publishing an article in a major news publication about his experiences during all of this. His free speech is quite obviously not being suppressed.

ErikVandeWater 9y ago
> End of story. And he has the right to complain about being fired. End of story.
- sageikosa 9y ago
  I can complain about going out in the rain and getting wet. End of story.
monus 9y ago
What is the point of think tanks then? Just get paid by companies and do their propaganda but expect people to believe your thoughts are free because it's a "non-profit"?
- EpicEng 9y ago
  Well, that's a good question for the think tanks. I imagine they always want more funding, so they reach out to corporations, and ultimately find themselves in conflict. I'm sure they'd argue that, without the corporate money, they wouldn't exist in the first place. Catch 22.
thomastjeffery 9y ago
The crux of the issue he is describing is not that his speech rights are being violated, but that Google has the power to fire him from a company that is not part of Google. And that Google used that power in reaction to his speech. > If you don't like your employer, you can leave. That's how it works. End of story. And go where? Another similar company, right? While that isn't what happened in this specific situation, this guy brings up a valid point about monopolies: If you work for a company, and that company is a monopoly, you can't just leave, because you have literally nowhere else to go. Therefore that company has control over your speech without violating your constitutional rights. That is one of many reasons we should be concerned about the centralization of power Google/Alphabet has acquired. > The guy is publishing an article in a major news publication about his experiences during all of this. His free speech is quite obviously not being suppressed. His speech clearly was suppressed. Just because he found a new outlet for it does not mean anything to the contrary.
- spacemanmatt 9y ago
  Is it suppression when your employer declines to use their power to amplify a message they don't agree with? Seems like that crosses the line into expecting others to help you speak, which is not a right.

ErikVandeWater 9y ago

> End of story. And he has the right to complain about being fired. End of story.

sageikosa 9y ago
I can complain about going out in the rain and getting wet. End of story.

monus 9y ago

What is the point of think tanks then? Just get paid by companies and do their propaganda but expect people to believe your thoughts are free because it's a "non-profit"?

EpicEng 9y ago
Well, that's a good question for the think tanks. I imagine they always want more funding, so they reach out to corporations, and ultimately find themselves in conflict. I'm sure they'd argue that, without the corporate money, they wouldn't exist in the first place. Catch 22.

thomastjeffery 9y ago

The crux of the issue he is describing is not that his speech rights are being violated, but that Google has the power to fire him from a company that is not part of Google. And that Google used that power in reaction to his speech. > If you don't like your employer, you can leave. That's how it works. End of story. And go where? Another similar company, right? While that isn't what happened in this specific situation, this guy brings up a valid point about monopolies: If you work for a company, and that company is a monopoly, you can't just leave, because you have literally nowhere else to go. Therefore that company has control over your speech without violating your constitutional rights. That is one of many reasons we should be concerned about the centralization of power Google/Alphabet has acquired. > The guy is publishing an article in a major news publication about his experiences during all of this. His free speech is quite obviously not being suppressed. His speech clearly was suppressed. Just because he found a new outlet for it does not mean anything to the contrary.

spacemanmatt 9y ago
Is it suppression when your employer declines to use their power to amplify a message they don't agree with? Seems like that crosses the line into expecting others to help you speak, which is not a right.