This is the core piece of the article's argument: "In creating social media accounts with these communication features, like a Facebook page with a comments se

This is the core piece of the article's argument: "In creating social media accounts with these communication features, like a Facebook page with a comments section, or a Twitter account that permits tagging and replies, the government endows the public with First Amendment rights to speak in these forums. The First Amendment forbids viewpoint-based speech restrictions like those that result from blocking. The legal doctrine that applies here is the same one that is used to determine the government’s ability to regulate speech in government-controlled places or programs—the Forum Doctrine. [1][2] Essentially, government-controlled forums for speech are divided into three categories [which then determine what can or cannot be controlled.]" That is of course begging the question as to whether a Twitter account qualifies as a government-controlled place or program. And there are major implications of this qualification, far beyond whether politicians are allowed to block people on Twitter. I do not think TV and online private discussion platform have much in common. And I'm sure companies like Twitter and Facebook will fight to try to keep it that way. Television has become somewhat deregulated, but it's still under infinitely more rules and regulations than social media today. For instance the television rules against profanity and nudity did not come from television stations themselves - it was rules imposed on them by the FCC. A single slip of the word fuck was enough to subject stations to huge fines. The enforcement of those rules (huge fines in particular) was deemed unconstitutional only in 2010! There still mountains of other rules and regulations in place on television nonetheless. This is certainly not where social media sites want to find themselves. And to be clear, I'm not suggesting that if it is decided the politicians cannot legally block people on Twitter then suddenly that swearing will be regulated against. That is clearly absurd. What I am saying is that the current state of social media is very much unlike other more traditional platforms, like television. And so comparison between them, as a form of precedent, is not terribly meaningful. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forum_%28legal%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forum_%28legal%29 [2] - https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/forums https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/forums