6 ms·

Facebook is a business, the government is not. Facebook can remove whatever it wants, the government can't. First amendment applies to the government.

lmm 6y ago
The first amendment was written when the idea of a corporation as large and powerful as Facebook was unthinkable. We need better protection for free speech that applies to corporate platforms (or perhaps to just apply the same common carrier rules we apply to the phone system to other platforms).
- JumpCrisscross 6y ago
  > first amendment was written when the idea of a corporation as large and powerful as Facebook was unthinkable The First Amendment was adopted in 1791 [1]. The Dutch East India Company was founded in 1602 [2]. The British East India Company even earlier [3]. Massively powerful global corporations pre-date the United States by a century. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_Unite... [2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_East_India_Company https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_East_India_Company [3] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_India_Company#/media/File%3ACoat_of_arms_of_the_East_India_Company.svg https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_India_Company#/media/Fi...
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- three_seagrass 6y ago
  Not true. The Dutch West Indies Corporation, one of the largest in history, existed before and during the ratification of the U.S. constitution. You are projecting presentism to assume that the 'founding fathers' were ignorant to large corporations.
  - sjwright 6y ago
    If you think the Dutch West Indies Corporation ever had even a patch on the cultural influence that Facebook has though the behaviour of it’s algorithm, you’re being utterly delusional.
    - oneplane 6y ago
      The Dutch West Indies Corporation ate entire countries for breakfast, and wasn't hiding it either. While tech companies can certainly play a role in communication when overthrowing governments, they aren't usually rolling in to other countries and taking over whatever they want.
    - JumpCrisscross 6y ago
      > the Dutch West Indies Corporation ever had even a patch on the cultural influence that Facebook has though the behaviour of it’s algorithm Sorry, where are the armed men operating directly under Facebook’s officers’ command, raining down atrocity and terror on entire subcontinents of humans?
    - JamisonM 6y ago
      The British East India was also founded around the same time. Their cultural impact was at the time certainly as vast as Facebook's, the company literally passed laws in India. The salt monopoly and taxes was at the centre of one of the most important events in Indian history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salt_March https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salt_March
      - sjwright 6y ago
        I don't agree that laws influence culture.
- im_down_w_otp 6y ago
  The East India Trading Company preceded the writing of the First Amendment by some distance, and that company for some period accounted for fully 1/2 of all global trade. Giant corporate entities with incentives intertwined and power competing with established governments have been a thing long before Facebook rose to prominence and long before the US Constitution was ratified.
ffggvv 6y ago
no one is saying it’s illegal. they’re disagreeing with the policy. just like many would cry if fb banned lgbt content even thought it would be legal
chroem- 6y ago
So what's stopping the grocery store from denying you service because they don't like the poltical campaign bumper sticker on your car? This is not a good precedent.
- JumpCrisscross 6y ago
  > what's stopping the grocery store from denying you service because they don't like the poltical campaign bumper sticker on your car? The principle of free speech restrains them. Nothing does—nor should—stop them. Civil freedom of speech is difficult to enshrine into law. It balances against other freedoms in a complex, unpredictable way. (For example, the freedom of assembly. If someone says something distasteful, one should be free to not associate with them.) But it has its place as a cultural value. It is also sensitive to context. A bumper sticker on an employee’s car is quite different from one on a customer’s.
- three_seagrass 6y ago
  The grocery store reserves the right to refuse service to whomever they want, so long as they are not a protected class. Are you saying you want to take that freedom away from private businesses?
  - chroem- 6y ago
    If Hobby Lobby and Chick-fil-A announce tomorrow morning that they are refusing service to all people who voted for a Democratic candidate in the last few election cycles (something that's within the realm of plausibility), what would be your initial reaction?
    - three_seagrass 6y ago
      You did not answer the question - Do you want to take that freedom away from American businesses? Political party is not a protected class, so those businesses are well in their right to do so (despite being sued by shareholders for eliminating half their revenue). It's the same way that those businesses reserve the right to kick out Nazis and alt-right scum.

lmm 6y ago

The first amendment was written when the idea of a corporation as large and powerful as Facebook was unthinkable. We need better protection for free speech that applies to corporate platforms (or perhaps to just apply the same common carrier rules we apply to the phone system to other platforms).

JumpCrisscross 6y ago
> first amendment was written when the idea of a corporation as large and powerful as Facebook was unthinkable The First Amendment was adopted in 1791 [1]. The Dutch East India Company was founded in 1602 [2]. The British East India Company even earlier [3]. Massively powerful global corporations pre-date the United States by a century. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_Unite... [2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_East_India_Company https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_East_India_Company [3] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_India_Company#/media/File%3ACoat_of_arms_of_the_East_India_Company.svg https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_India_Company#/media/Fi...
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
three_seagrass 6y ago
Not true. The Dutch West Indies Corporation, one of the largest in history, existed before and during the ratification of the U.S. constitution. You are projecting presentism to assume that the 'founding fathers' were ignorant to large corporations.
- sjwright 6y ago
  If you think the Dutch West Indies Corporation ever had even a patch on the cultural influence that Facebook has though the behaviour of it’s algorithm, you’re being utterly delusional.
  - oneplane 6y ago
    The Dutch West Indies Corporation ate entire countries for breakfast, and wasn't hiding it either. While tech companies can certainly play a role in communication when overthrowing governments, they aren't usually rolling in to other countries and taking over whatever they want.
  - JumpCrisscross 6y ago
    > the Dutch West Indies Corporation ever had even a patch on the cultural influence that Facebook has though the behaviour of it’s algorithm Sorry, where are the armed men operating directly under Facebook’s officers’ command, raining down atrocity and terror on entire subcontinents of humans?
  - JamisonM 6y ago
    The British East India was also founded around the same time. Their cultural impact was at the time certainly as vast as Facebook's, the company literally passed laws in India. The salt monopoly and taxes was at the centre of one of the most important events in Indian history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salt_March https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salt_March
    - sjwright 6y ago
      I don't agree that laws influence culture.
im_down_w_otp 6y ago
The East India Trading Company preceded the writing of the First Amendment by some distance, and that company for some period accounted for fully 1/2 of all global trade. Giant corporate entities with incentives intertwined and power competing with established governments have been a thing long before Facebook rose to prominence and long before the US Constitution was ratified.

ffggvv 6y ago

no one is saying it’s illegal. they’re disagreeing with the policy. just like many would cry if fb banned lgbt content even thought it would be legal

chroem- 6y ago

So what's stopping the grocery store from denying you service because they don't like the poltical campaign bumper sticker on your car? This is not a good precedent.

JumpCrisscross 6y ago
> what's stopping the grocery store from denying you service because they don't like the poltical campaign bumper sticker on your car? The principle of free speech restrains them. Nothing does—nor should—stop them. Civil freedom of speech is difficult to enshrine into law. It balances against other freedoms in a complex, unpredictable way. (For example, the freedom of assembly. If someone says something distasteful, one should be free to not associate with them.) But it has its place as a cultural value. It is also sensitive to context. A bumper sticker on an employee’s car is quite different from one on a customer’s.
three_seagrass 6y ago
The grocery store reserves the right to refuse service to whomever they want, so long as they are not a protected class. Are you saying you want to take that freedom away from private businesses?
- chroem- 6y ago
  If Hobby Lobby and Chick-fil-A announce tomorrow morning that they are refusing service to all people who voted for a Democratic candidate in the last few election cycles (something that's within the realm of plausibility), what would be your initial reaction?
  - three_seagrass 6y ago
    You did not answer the question - Do you want to take that freedom away from American businesses? Political party is not a protected class, so those businesses are well in their right to do so (despite being sued by shareholders for eliminating half their revenue). It's the same way that those businesses reserve the right to kick out Nazis and alt-right scum.