3 ms·

And once again we’re back in 2018 trying to figure out whether these private companies should be considered “public squares”. I personally think speech censors

And once again we’re back in 2018 trying to figure out whether these private companies should be considered “public squares”. I personally think speech censorship, even by a private company, is wrong. However, there’s so much grey area that one could argue either way.

commandlinefan 6y ago
> speech censorship, even by a private company It seems to me that Facebook (or at least Mark Zuckerberg) actually agrees with you and wants FB to be an open platform, but are being pressured by activists to censor against their wishes. This kind of goes beyond "they're a private company, they can do what they want": it would appear that they can't do what they want.
- blueterminal 6y ago
  I am just amazed that people are for private companies censoring politicians. You really don't want to see everything politicians want to tell you? Even if it's a complete lie? You want Mark and Jack and others to hide that info from you? What is going on? I feel I am completely losing touch. It's scary.
  - dagmx 6y ago
    People keep jumping between the extremes of “show or don’t show the post” There are options in between like decrying the post for violence. Twitter did a good job here IMHO by having the post visible, but restricted behind a click through. They also didn’t cast aspersions on it, and sent you to more links to learn more.
moojd 6y ago
We need a better framework for discussing speech issues in general. Even here arguments devolve into semantics over what the first amendment applies to when we should really be discussing how we actually expect/want society to function. Maybe we can adopt RFC language. Example: must: A law should/does enforce this must-not: A law should/does forbid this should: You have the right to NOT do this, but I believe this is what should be done should-not: Although you have the right to do this, I believe you shouldn't do this social media platforms (must|must-not) have the right to police speech social media platforms (should|should-not|must|must-not) police speech
peruvian 6y ago
This Trump stuff is a red herring. I'd be more curious what people think about Facebook letting the anti-vax movement run wild and helping violence in Myanmar.

commandlinefan 6y ago

> speech censorship, even by a private company It seems to me that Facebook (or at least Mark Zuckerberg) actually agrees with you and wants FB to be an open platform, but are being pressured by activists to censor against their wishes. This kind of goes beyond "they're a private company, they can do what they want": it would appear that they can't do what they want.

blueterminal 6y ago
I am just amazed that people are for private companies censoring politicians. You really don't want to see everything politicians want to tell you? Even if it's a complete lie? You want Mark and Jack and others to hide that info from you? What is going on? I feel I am completely losing touch. It's scary.
- dagmx 6y ago
  People keep jumping between the extremes of “show or don’t show the post” There are options in between like decrying the post for violence. Twitter did a good job here IMHO by having the post visible, but restricted behind a click through. They also didn’t cast aspersions on it, and sent you to more links to learn more.

moojd 6y ago

We need a better framework for discussing speech issues in general. Even here arguments devolve into semantics over what the first amendment applies to when we should really be discussing how we actually expect/want society to function. Maybe we can adopt RFC language. Example: must: A law should/does enforce this must-not: A law should/does forbid this should: You have the right to NOT do this, but I believe this is what should be done should-not: Although you have the right to do this, I believe you shouldn't do this social media platforms (must|must-not) have the right to police speech social media platforms (should|should-not|must|must-not) police speech

peruvian 6y ago

This Trump stuff is a red herring. I'd be more curious what people think about Facebook letting the anti-vax movement run wild and helping violence in Myanmar.