3 ms·
It's always fascinating how quick people are to jump on the slippery slope bandwagon when it suits their ends. Your suggestion that privately held malls are su
by schmidtc 7y ago
It's always fascinating how quick people are to jump on the slippery slope bandwagon when it suits their ends.
Your suggestion that privately held malls are subject to free speech protections is misleading. See Lloyd Corp. v. Tanner. There are counter examples of course, be these apply only in niche situations.
Regardless, Facebook is not a public space. It's very much a private space. Suggesting that Facebook be treated as a public space is a pretty radical idea.
- naasking 7y ago> Your suggestion that privately held malls are subject to free speech protections is misleading. See Lloyd Corp. v. Tanner. Not misleading at all, I said it sometimes applies, which is true because some states recognize it as a right and some don't. > Regardless, Facebook is not a public space. It's very much a private space. A private space that anyone and everyone can freely access, and are, in fact, encouraged to frequent as much as humanly possible, and arguably has become intrinsic to the daily life of many, perhaps most, Americans. In fact, it's probably one of their primary means of socializing with friends and family, and definitely a medium for political discourse. Arguing it's a private space seems increasingly flimsy, frankly.
- drak0n1c 7y agoAre there no constitutional protections if you live in a company town? Facebook is effectively the company town of mass real identity to real identity communication. One of the Net Neutrality arguments championed by the EFF was that private oligopolies being allowed to do whatever they want with their own property constituted a threat to free speech. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/06/attack-net-neutrality-attack-free-speech https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/06/attack-net-neutrality-...
- naasking 7y ago> Regardless, Facebook is not a public space. It's very much a private space. Suggesting that Facebook be treated as a public space is a pretty radical idea. Further precedent I recently came across suggests it's not so radical after all: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Packingham_v._North_Carolina https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Packingham_v._North_Carolina Unanimous decision by the Supreme Court actually called social media the public square.