3 ms·

> This has nothing to do with the Constitution and everything to do with their licenses for public airwaves. Public airwaves? This applied during the landline

> This has nothing to do with the Constitution and everything to do with their licenses for public airwaves. Public airwaves? This applied during the landline days and it had more to do with the idea of monopolies/utilites/trusts. Either way, it debunks your point that non-government entities are all allowed to censor...

XorNot 6y ago
The protections the telephone companies have are based on their desire to remain common carrier status, and not being considered curators or providers of the content they carry. It's not they can't censor, it's that if they do then their legal status changes in a way they do not wish it too.
- dntbnmpls 6y ago
  > It's not they can't censor, it's that if they do then their legal status changes in a way they do not wish it too. In other words, they can't censor as they are. A private company cannot censor.
  - patagurbon 6y ago
    >they can't censor as they are. Yes >A private company cannot censor No. They are common carriers. Twitter and the vast majority of other companies are not.
    - dntbnmpls 6y ago
      > No. But you said "Yes" two lines above. > They are common carriers. These common carriers are private companies, not public companies. They aren't owned by the government. They are owned by private shareholders. AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, etc are private companies or non government entities. > Twitter and the vast majority of other companies are not. I never claimed twitter and the vast majority of companies are. I only responded to the assertion that all "non government entities" can censor. I was providing proof that some non government entities cannot censor.
      - NwmG 6y ago
        They can indeed censor, I think what the prior poster was saying is that if they choose to censor, their regulation changes.
        dntbnmpls 6y ago
        That's not how it works. They can't censor. It's why they don't. Can you show me anyone who has been #Canceled from their phone service? Ever wonder why nobody demanded Harvey Weinstein or Trump lose their phone numbers? Because they can't do it. If AT&T wants to censor, they have to go find other business. They can't be in the telephone business and censor. It's a lawsuit and possible jail for the execs involved. People are so desperate to justify censorship that they'll make up nonsense. I can't believe anyone is dumb enough to believe all the pro-censorship nonsense in my thread. The only explanation is bias once again forcing people to make up and accept nonsense.
patagurbon 6y ago
His point was that the 1st amendment applies only to Congress. There are other laws that apply to other entities, but currently no law prevents Twitter from censoring.

XorNot 6y ago

The protections the telephone companies have are based on their desire to remain common carrier status, and not being considered curators or providers of the content they carry. It's not they can't censor, it's that if they do then their legal status changes in a way they do not wish it too.

dntbnmpls 6y ago
> It's not they can't censor, it's that if they do then their legal status changes in a way they do not wish it too. In other words, they can't censor as they are. A private company cannot censor.
- patagurbon 6y ago
  >they can't censor as they are. Yes >A private company cannot censor No. They are common carriers. Twitter and the vast majority of other companies are not.
  - dntbnmpls 6y ago
    > No. But you said "Yes" two lines above. > They are common carriers. These common carriers are private companies, not public companies. They aren't owned by the government. They are owned by private shareholders. AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, etc are private companies or non government entities. > Twitter and the vast majority of other companies are not. I never claimed twitter and the vast majority of companies are. I only responded to the assertion that all "non government entities" can censor. I was providing proof that some non government entities cannot censor.
    - NwmG 6y ago
      They can indeed censor, I think what the prior poster was saying is that if they choose to censor, their regulation changes.
      - dntbnmpls 6y ago
        That's not how it works. They can't censor. It's why they don't. Can you show me anyone who has been #Canceled from their phone service? Ever wonder why nobody demanded Harvey Weinstein or Trump lose their phone numbers? Because they can't do it. If AT&T wants to censor, they have to go find other business. They can't be in the telephone business and censor. It's a lawsuit and possible jail for the execs involved. People are so desperate to justify censorship that they'll make up nonsense. I can't believe anyone is dumb enough to believe all the pro-censorship nonsense in my thread. The only explanation is bias once again forcing people to make up and accept nonsense.

patagurbon 6y ago

His point was that the 1st amendment applies only to Congress. There are other laws that apply to other entities, but currently no law prevents Twitter from censoring.