3 ms·
If radio involved typing another url into my browser or installing another app, and the telephone didn't require running cables across large tracks of public la
by mattnewton 6y ago
If radio involved typing another url into my browser or installing another app, and the telephone didn't require running cables across large tracks of public land with the cooperation of government, yeah, maybe that would be how it could work.
In your social media example, the only case where it doesn't involve easy alternatives is the size of a public audience; so it would be more like a television host being dropped by the network because they don't like their views. If you are trying to communicate with friends and family, or even with large section of the public, there are absolutely alternatives. What you want is more akin to compelling a television network to air someone because they can't reach as many strangers without that television networks large audience.
- WClayFerguson 6y agoTV/Radio broadcast has absolutely nothing to do with any of this. Those are "one way", and involve 10s of broadcasters rather than literally everyone in the world being able to talk to everyone else simultaneously in real-time. You are very very very confused about the issues.
- mattnewton 6y agoIt is like an anchor because the main ill you have claimed is that someone will lose reach to a large audience- and TV anchors show that we have no right to reach the audience enjoyed by a platform in at least that medium. Why do we need legal protection to ensure we can reach the audience enjoyed by Twitter? Why is reaching out to journalists via phone and email insufficient? Can the public not be informed by someone's website? Is it a question of degree and size?
- WClayFerguson 6y agoWhy do we need email when we already had the US postal service right? haha. Yeah, I guess it's all a matter of degree and judgement isn't it. good lord you're funny. Thanks.