3 ms·

Well if big companies get to just set arbitrary rules that discriminate against one set of political beliefs, what does that say about "Civil Rights" then? I gu

Well if big companies get to just set arbitrary rules that discriminate against one set of political beliefs, what does that say about "Civil Rights" then? I guess you're not a big fan of civil rights... Or, more likely, is it only when companies are doing things you agree with that you'll claim they have absolute power and authority? If you understand history, you might see the flaw in this logic.

fishtacos 6y ago
These companies are not "discriminating" against any particular political view. Calls for political violence and extremism/terrorism have and continue to be moderated on these platforms from both sides. It is unfortunate that you don't understand the distinction between inciting violence via either direct calls for such or indirectly by repeating the same unfounded lies of "a stolen election" VS political speech/civil rights, which have not been abrogated (there are plenty of conservative commentators on Twitter, some of whom I follow). As for my background, I am an immigrant from a post-communist Eastern European country, live in the US in the South and finished with political science and journalism degrees. Can assure you my appreciation of civil rights is intact. As a general rule, even when situations like this occur, I lean on the side of caution, so I understand the slippery slope argument you're making. There will continue to be a national discussion about what the limits are in the still-uncharted world of social media and the limits of expression vs. platform and publisher rights, but your alarmist view is, IMO, over the top.
- WClayFerguson 6y ago
  Congress has held numerous hearings about censorship starting way back when the first nose-ring wearing, openly socialist, 20-something overlords in Silicon Valley started censoring heads of state, and government officials for clearly and blatantly partisan political reasons. I mean after the election a poll showed 68% of voters had never even heard of the Hunter Laptop, because BigTech started banning anyone who dare even mention it. So don't be fooled that the censorship is to stop violence, it's to achieve political goals, and has been ratcheting up for the past 6 years. Twitter was canceling people for life even for daring to say such crazy things as "There's only two sexes." Cancel culture has been getting out of hand for a long long time now, and people have had all they're going to take of it. Now the left has gotten so brazen they're conspiring to shut down entire internet companies under these same false pretenses. And you have the audacity to call this "alarmist". Wow.

fishtacos 6y ago

These companies are not "discriminating" against any particular political view. Calls for political violence and extremism/terrorism have and continue to be moderated on these platforms from both sides. It is unfortunate that you don't understand the distinction between inciting violence via either direct calls for such or indirectly by repeating the same unfounded lies of "a stolen election" VS political speech/civil rights, which have not been abrogated (there are plenty of conservative commentators on Twitter, some of whom I follow). As for my background, I am an immigrant from a post-communist Eastern European country, live in the US in the South and finished with political science and journalism degrees. Can assure you my appreciation of civil rights is intact. As a general rule, even when situations like this occur, I lean on the side of caution, so I understand the slippery slope argument you're making. There will continue to be a national discussion about what the limits are in the still-uncharted world of social media and the limits of expression vs. platform and publisher rights, but your alarmist view is, IMO, over the top.

WClayFerguson 6y ago
Congress has held numerous hearings about censorship starting way back when the first nose-ring wearing, openly socialist, 20-something overlords in Silicon Valley started censoring heads of state, and government officials for clearly and blatantly partisan political reasons. I mean after the election a poll showed 68% of voters had never even heard of the Hunter Laptop, because BigTech started banning anyone who dare even mention it. So don't be fooled that the censorship is to stop violence, it's to achieve political goals, and has been ratcheting up for the past 6 years. Twitter was canceling people for life even for daring to say such crazy things as "There's only two sexes." Cancel culture has been getting out of hand for a long long time now, and people have had all they're going to take of it. Now the left has gotten so brazen they're conspiring to shut down entire internet companies under these same false pretenses. And you have the audacity to call this "alarmist". Wow.