3 ms·

> Even "common carriers" don't have to carry everything. Looking at your comments it seems like you at least agree that common carriers are subject to some law

• triceratops 6y ago
  And yet you don't seem to accept that common carriers perform moderation too. Nor have you acknowledged that ISPs aren't common carriers and the current FCC made it that way. Nor have you acknowledged the hypocrisy of this.
  • stale2002 6y ago
    > that common carriers perform moderation I've specifically clarified that common carriers are subject to certain restrictions on what they can do, and am saying that those restrictions should apply to social media, with a law change. > the current FCC My specific claim is that the law should be changed such that they are subject to common carrier laws. Social media companies are not currently subject to them, but I am saying that the law should be changed so that they are. If you want to say that the law should be changed so that ISPs are subject to those as well, then go ahead and argue that, but that does not contradict what I am arguing for. Anyway, I am just glad at this point that you agree that common carriers are subject to certain restrictions, which was my point the whole time. And I am saying that those same restrictions, that you agree exist, should be applied to social media companies, via a law change.