2 ms·
The problem is bigger than consensual exchange. Amazon doesn’t owe you an audience, yes, but we do prefer to live in a culture that doesn’t remove access to an
by tjs8rj 6y ago
The problem is bigger than consensual exchange. Amazon doesn’t owe you an audience, yes, but we do prefer to live in a culture that doesn’t remove access to an audience based on a disagreement with the content. If google blocked all search terms leading to republican or conservative content, that would be an issue. Not because google owes them search engine traffic, but because its broadly accepted to be morally wrong to deny equal access based on a disagreement in content.
Allowing the same is the definition of paving the road to hell with good intentions, where good intentions is letting private companies erode society with their immense influence just because they are entitled to each step along the way.
- lotsofpulp 6y ago> yes, but we do prefer to live in a culture that doesn’t remove access to an audience based on a disagreement with the content. That’s not the US I grew up in. The government has blocked access to content via public airwaves, different stores “block” access to various products, movie theaters “block” access to movies with certain ratings, etc. I don’t expect a religious publisher to start publishing literature it thinks is harmful, but I wouldn’t say it’s “blocking” anyone.