3 ms·
You’re unintentionally making a straw man. There is no contradiction. I believe social media should be regulated more tightly. Until then they have the freedom
by MichaelApproved 6y ago
You’re unintentionally making a straw man. There is no contradiction.
I believe social media should be regulated more tightly. Until then they have the freedom to remove the content according to their TOS.
Just because I’m pointing out that they have the freedom it doesnt mean I believe they should continue to have the freedom.
Government regulations are desperately needed.
Even more so, government enforcement of existing regulations are needed. There’ve been many threats of violence on social media with few being investigated.
- jonny_eh 6y agoOr they should be regulated in some ways but not others. There's a big distance between "run by the govt" and "totally free of govt meddling".
- geofft 6y agoThat's a good way of putting it. I think this happens often - the progressive/leftist/etc. position involves multiple points of departure from our current society, and if you try to look at the merits of any single strand by itself, it falls apart. For instance, many progressives are advocates of people losing their jobs for harassing coworkers. If you look at this position in isolation, it looks like they're arguing for a cold corporatism, that anyone who threatens the reputation of the corporation should be thrown onto the streets. However, many progressives are also advocates of stronger social safety nets for people who lose their jobs, whether by their own misdeeds or misfortune - from increased unemployment (or even UBI), to stronger tenants' protections, to government-provided healthcare. Firing someone for their misdeeds is much less cruel once those safety nets are in place, and the moral calculus very rapidly shifts to protecting their coworkers.