3 ms·

This is unprecedented. For the first time in US history, there is active censorship towards the sitting president. Some people say the first amendment doesn't a

This is unprecedented. For the first time in US history, there is active censorship towards the sitting president. Some people say the first amendment doesn't apply to "private enterprise" - but it does apply to the press, which Big Tech replaced with their platforms. Twitter & Facebook act as a) De facto spaces of prominent public debate b) De facto news content (press) De jure, they pretend they're in private tech business (to escape legal responsibility of a +b) Section 230 gives them special immunity to censor any content they like, which makes them the arbiters of truth. This is incompatible with the US constitution, at last in spirit. This is a reversion to feudalism. Roads in Europe used to be private property of Lords, you had to pay to use them. The National Republics (Nationalism) along with the Constitution (Constitutionalism) had the objective to define & uphold de jure the public space (from feudalism). Right now, you're paying (indirectly) to use the roads of discourse and information dissemination, controlled by Twitter, Facebook and Google. This cannot continue in a democracy worth its name, and it is the opposite of what the US stands for. [0] some quotes from https://twitter.com/_benoux_/status/1347155317516365826?s=21 https://twitter.com/_benoux_/status/1347155317516365826?s=21

jankyxenon 6y ago
You said the first amendment applies to the press. What does that mean? Is a news outlet obligated to run the words of a President? I’m against the ban, but I don’t understand your reasoning.
ausbah 6y ago
big tech platforms don't produce any content, they just host / publish what others create
- MrBuddyCasino 6y ago
  This is sophistry. They can and do decide what is trending or suppressed, what passes and what gets deleted. They don't have to write anything to steer the public debate - there are millions of posts being written, selection suffices.
  - ausbah 6y ago
    I think my definitions of who writes content vs who publishes it was off, my bad I think everything you've said is correct until you get to the feudalism part of your analogy. the difference is you are still able to go and get information from others sources - creating your own if you have to. big social media platforms aren't the only "road" to travel down, there are alternatives
    - MrBuddyCasino 6y ago
      Respect for correcting yourself, that is a rare thing to see. > the difference is you are still able to go and get information from others sources True. If you want to stay with the road analogy, the big and fast roads will be closed to you, you have to resort to using the narrow forrest paths where your car can't drive. Those paths aren't easily found, and they are more cumbersome to use. It is qualitatively not the same. Also, at what point do you become a non-citizen? When Google & Amazon cut you off? Your payment processor stops working? CloudFlare kicks you off their network? Paypal freezes your funds? AWS won't host you anymore? FB & Twitter delete your accounts? Your political enemies pressure your employer to fire you?

jankyxenon 6y ago

You said the first amendment applies to the press. What does that mean? Is a news outlet obligated to run the words of a President? I’m against the ban, but I don’t understand your reasoning.

ausbah 6y ago

big tech platforms don't produce any content, they just host / publish what others create

MrBuddyCasino 6y ago
This is sophistry. They can and do decide what is trending or suppressed, what passes and what gets deleted. They don't have to write anything to steer the public debate - there are millions of posts being written, selection suffices.
- ausbah 6y ago
  I think my definitions of who writes content vs who publishes it was off, my bad I think everything you've said is correct until you get to the feudalism part of your analogy. the difference is you are still able to go and get information from others sources - creating your own if you have to. big social media platforms aren't the only "road" to travel down, there are alternatives
  - MrBuddyCasino 6y ago
    Respect for correcting yourself, that is a rare thing to see. > the difference is you are still able to go and get information from others sources True. If you want to stay with the road analogy, the big and fast roads will be closed to you, you have to resort to using the narrow forrest paths where your car can't drive. Those paths aren't easily found, and they are more cumbersome to use. It is qualitatively not the same. Also, at what point do you become a non-citizen? When Google & Amazon cut you off? Your payment processor stops working? CloudFlare kicks you off their network? Paypal freezes your funds? AWS won't host you anymore? FB & Twitter delete your accounts? Your political enemies pressure your employer to fire you?