4 ms·

I’m staggered by the number of people who don’t get this point. You can write any book you want - but no one is under any obligation to publish it for you.

dionian 6y ago
Twitter is a platform, not a publisher, in theory
- Jtsummers 6y ago
  What’s the difference in your mind between those? Both in general and legally?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- schoen 6y ago
  This distinction doesn't exist under the actually existing version of §230. I think it's shocking how Twitter has completely changed course from its "free speech wing of the free speech party" positioning, and I understand why people find it frustrating that you don't have to "choose between being a platform and a publisher". But you don't; that's not the law and it hasn't been the law for over a quarter-century. And that rule has mostly been a very good thing for online speech. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230#Background_and_passage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230#Background_and_pas...
ars 6y ago
> but no one is under any obligation to publish it for you. Is the Post Office under an obligation to mail your book to your subscriber list? No one is asking Twitter to put his messages on their front page, but anything who specifically subscribed should be able to see anything he writes.
- lhorie 6y ago
  No, Twitter is within its right to remove stuff that goes against its policy. e.g. no one in their right mind would argue to keep a tweet up if it was a picture of child pornography.
  - casefields 6y ago
    Child pornography is illegal. If Trumps tweet is illegal, then the authorities would love to know and the justice system can handle it. No one is asking Twitter to break the law, nor host illegal content of any kind.
    - lhorie 6y ago
      Sure, but the point is that Twitter would be justified in proactively removing said content before a legal order to that effect got served. More broadly, Twitter is not obligated to keep tweets up from anyone to anyone. It would be rather silly if, for example, all tweets from north america got deleted and people got up in arms accusing it of "censorship" (in a hypothetical scenario where unbeknownst to them, there was a catastrophic infrastructure failure).
- emptyparadise 6y ago
  The USPS is a government agency, Twitter is not.

dionian 6y ago

Twitter is a platform, not a publisher, in theory

Jtsummers 6y ago
What’s the difference in your mind between those? Both in general and legally?
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
schoen 6y ago
This distinction doesn't exist under the actually existing version of §230. I think it's shocking how Twitter has completely changed course from its "free speech wing of the free speech party" positioning, and I understand why people find it frustrating that you don't have to "choose between being a platform and a publisher". But you don't; that's not the law and it hasn't been the law for over a quarter-century. And that rule has mostly been a very good thing for online speech. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230#Background_and_passage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230#Background_and_pas...

ars 6y ago

> but no one is under any obligation to publish it for you. Is the Post Office under an obligation to mail your book to your subscriber list? No one is asking Twitter to put his messages on their front page, but anything who specifically subscribed should be able to see anything he writes.

lhorie 6y ago
No, Twitter is within its right to remove stuff that goes against its policy. e.g. no one in their right mind would argue to keep a tweet up if it was a picture of child pornography.
- casefields 6y ago
  Child pornography is illegal. If Trumps tweet is illegal, then the authorities would love to know and the justice system can handle it. No one is asking Twitter to break the law, nor host illegal content of any kind.
  - lhorie 6y ago
    Sure, but the point is that Twitter would be justified in proactively removing said content before a legal order to that effect got served. More broadly, Twitter is not obligated to keep tweets up from anyone to anyone. It would be rather silly if, for example, all tweets from north america got deleted and people got up in arms accusing it of "censorship" (in a hypothetical scenario where unbeknownst to them, there was a catastrophic infrastructure failure).
emptyparadise 6y ago
The USPS is a government agency, Twitter is not.