4 ms·
A lot of pedants are telling you it's not censorship and they are technically correct, these private platforms are within their rights to decide how they are us
by iujjkfjdkkdkf 6y ago
A lot of pedants are telling you it's not censorship and they are technically correct, these private platforms are within their rights to decide how they are used. And many people have raised concerns before about what it means that we've given so much power to these platforms. I hope this goes down as the time the big platforms overplayed their hand and made people realise that even though we have turned over so much power to them, they do not have the same constraints or responsibilities as government, and as private businesses can act arbitrarily according to their prerogative.
- malwarebytess 6y agoWhile they may be pedants, I am anally right. On a personal level I think those who chime in to cry that it's not censorship are myopic fools. It is absolutely censorship. It's textbook, dictionary, censorship. Take wikipedia's great opening paragraph: >Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information, on the basis that such material is considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or "inconvenient." Censorship can be conducted by governments, private institutions, and other controlling bodies. In my opinion it's especially egreoious, requiring remedy, if the censorious actor has a large amount of control over a medium of communication. In this case google dwarfs perhaps governments.
- iujjkfjdkkdkf 6y agoRight, it's censorship, it's not first amendment limitation of free speech, I think that is where the semantics come in.
- hndudette2 6y ago> telling you it's not censorship and they are technically correct No, they are technically incorrect. As other posters have pointed out, it literally is censorship. Whether a private company or government is doing it is irrelevant to the definition of that term.