3 ms·
The company twitter has set its terms of service. That is speech. What you're suggesting is eliminating the corporation's ability to do speak in that manner. D
by kevinmchugh 8y ago
The company twitter has set its terms of service. That is speech. What you're suggesting is eliminating the corporation's ability to do speak in that manner.
Do you believe the US government has the ability to simply prohibit speech by corporate entities? Is it in accordance with free speech principles for a federal government to prohibit certain types of speech?
- sleepysysadmin 8y agoBy forcing freedom of speech onto twitter for example. I don't see how that would be restricting their speech. Personally I see this as something that will come eventually. However, I don't think that's what Twitter should do. My idea is that twitter should act more like the united nations. You create a 'diplomatic immunity' type of account that people can request. It can be something like: Minimum 50,000 followers. Account history of 1 year. If approved you can no longer edit or delete your posts; but you also cant be kicked off twitter or other be harmed by rules of twitter. this by itself will solve the problem that twitter has.
- smadge 8y agoI don't think terms of service, basically a contract, fall under free speech. If you and I make a verbal contract that you will assassinate someone we are still breaking the law because assassinations are illegal. Our free speech isn't being violated when we are arrested for doing something illegal.