4 ms·

And, we already know that's not entirely true. There was a recent decision that POTUS twitter feed is a public space (https://theconversation.com/federal-judge

And, we already know that's not entirely true. There was a recent decision that POTUS twitter feed is a public space (https://theconversation.com/federal-judge-rules-trumps-twitter-account-is-a-public-forum-97159 https://theconversation.com/federal-judge-rules-trumps-twitt...) . We can easily see this extended to any US elected official. And there is also historical context in an 1980 decision in Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins where, based on Californian law, private property of the shoping mall was deemed open to political speech (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruneyard_Shopping_Center_v._Robins https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruneyard_Shopping_Center_v._R...) When its a private, non-political forum, the corps can do as they choose. But once politics and political speech move in along with public elected officials, all bets are off. (Thanks to hn:dexen for the links. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20268802 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20268802 )

marcinzm 7y ago
The distinction, in this case, is that's it's NOT about using an existing forum for something. Web pages do not come with comment sections by default. So the discussion (ie: not having comments being a restriction of free speech) is about requiring you to build a forum specifically for speech to take place. It's like requiring a shopping mall to build a stage for people to have political speeches on. I feel few people would say free speech is infringed upon if every mall doesn't build such a stage.
- crankylinuxuser 7y ago
  Sigh. > The distinction, in this case, is that's it's NOT about using an existing forum for something. Web pages do not come with comment sections by default. But social media does. And so does a lot of websites that use either wordpress plugins, Discus, or other sites. And nothing I cited requires a comments section to be made... But when it is, there's precedent for forcing whomever's running it to make way for political speech when politicians are stumping and talking there. > It's like requiring a shopping mall to build a stage for people to have political speeches on. I feel few people would say free speech is infringed upon if every mall doesn't build such a stage. The very act of having a floor in the private mall was enough. You don't need a stage. And even gathering signatures for a political reason is reason enough. Seriously, go look up the Pruneyard rule. You can try to derail it with 'whatifs', but that is precedent.

marcinzm 7y ago

The distinction, in this case, is that's it's NOT about using an existing forum for something. Web pages do not come with comment sections by default. So the discussion (ie: not having comments being a restriction of free speech) is about requiring you to build a forum specifically for speech to take place. It's like requiring a shopping mall to build a stage for people to have political speeches on. I feel few people would say free speech is infringed upon if every mall doesn't build such a stage.

crankylinuxuser 7y ago
Sigh. > The distinction, in this case, is that's it's NOT about using an existing forum for something. Web pages do not come with comment sections by default. But social media does. And so does a lot of websites that use either wordpress plugins, Discus, or other sites. And nothing I cited requires a comments section to be made... But when it is, there's precedent for forcing whomever's running it to make way for political speech when politicians are stumping and talking there. > It's like requiring a shopping mall to build a stage for people to have political speeches on. I feel few people would say free speech is infringed upon if every mall doesn't build such a stage. The very act of having a floor in the private mall was enough. You don't need a stage. And even gathering signatures for a political reason is reason enough. Seriously, go look up the Pruneyard rule. You can try to derail it with 'whatifs', but that is precedent.