4 ms·
It's legal for entities outside the government to censor things. IANAL so if I'm wrong let me know. But my understanding is that censorship is perfectly fine
by bargl 6y ago
It's legal for entities outside the government to censor things. IANAL so if I'm wrong let me know. But my understanding is that censorship is perfectly fine for any company.
- jpxw 6y agoThere’s a difference between what is legal and what is morally correct.
- crowbahr 6y agoEncouraging violent insurrection against the legally elected congress isn't moral either.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- bargl 6y agoAgreed. And these companies are following what they believe is morally correct. Also, this isn't going to be effective Parler is a website, people can just browse to it in Chrome/Safari... We should be promoting apps that encourage and promote healthy discourse between people not echo chambers, but that's what I think is morally correct.
- xyzzyz 6y agoIt's (typically) perfectly legal, but not necessarily perfectly fine.
- ng12 6y agoPrivate market censorship is legal w.r.t. the first amendment. If it's good for society is a separate question.
- jimbob45 6y agoUnless you do it to a privileged group. Then it’s discrimination.
- Anon1096 6y agoThat wasn't the question being asked.
- zucker42 6y agoI find undesirable to buy a phone where a company can arbitrarily decide what I am and am not allowed to run on my device. Because economies of scale make things cheaper if many people want them and because I generally believe in fighting the power of arbitrary or harmful corporate decisions, I try to convince others of the importance of this "feature" (really it's more of a lack of an anti-feature). Luckily you can still sideload apps on Android. The day they remove that feature is the day I take the time to figure out how to use an alternate OS.
- bargl 6y agoI fully agree with you on this.
- 236dev 6y agoIt also use to be legal to deny people based on their skin color. Just because something is legal doesn't make it right.
- bargl 6y agoAnd the laws changed. Hopefully we'll see that. We can't expect companies to be our moral compass.
- criddell 6y agoIs Google refusing to distribute Parler different from the NYT refusing to publish an article I send them?
- agiroth 6y agoYes. NYT is making an editorial decision. Google publishing an app is much more akin to you making a phone call - they are the carrier, nothing else, because they control the end of line.
- criddell 6y agoPhone companies also have terms of service. Here’s AT&T’s: > AT&T may immediately terminate all or a portion of your Service or reduce or suspend Service, without notice, for conduct that AT&T believes (a) is illegal, fraudulent, harassing, abusive, or intended to intimidate or threaten; (b) constitutes a violation of any law, regulation, or tariff (including, without applicable policies or guidelines (including the Acceptable Use Policy), and AT&T may refer such use to law enforcement authorities without notice to you.
- agiroth 6y agoAnd yet somehow have never resorted to saying who can and cannot use their service based on their political beliefs. Keep trying.
- 6y ago