4 ms·
Why should they be forced to distribute it? That's a pretty extreme stance, and you haven't provided a reason.
by spenczar5 6y ago
Why should they be forced to distribute it? That's a pretty extreme stance, and you haven't provided a reason.
- LegitShady 6y agoThey should have to choose between neutral publishing and liability on their networks. If they want to censor then section 230 of the communications decency act should be repealed and let them take ownership of their decisions. As it stands now they get zero liability for speech they can clearly police. I see hate groups in Facebook that Facebook doesn't close if reported. Let them own it
- spenczar5 6y agoRight, I get that that’s a position you can take, I just don’t see why.
- LegitShady 6y agoTo protect society from technocrat control of speech.
- RonanTheGrey 6y agoThey're not forced to distribute it any more than they're forced to distribute content they do agree with. In both cases, they're already providing the service to distribute it; they're simply leaving it alone and not acting at all. Incidentally that's the best way for them to retain their Section 230 protection -- neutrality.