6 ms·

“Social media platforms have morphed into the town square” - sounds like they want government-run social media instead of privately-operated social media. Mayb

by mfkp 5y ago

“Social media platforms have morphed into the town square” - sounds like they want government-run social media instead of privately-operated social media. Maybe Ron DeSantis should start his own social media platform instead of attempting to force private businesses to give up their freedoms. Edit: this comment was originally posted in comments for this link: https://www.flgov.com/2021/05/24/governor-ron-desantis-signs-bill-to-stop-the-censorship-of-floridians-by-big-tech/ https://www.flgov.com/2021/05/24/governor-ron-desantis-signs... (got merged into the NYT article) Edit 2: I guess this is HN's way of censoring political content. Mark hot/upcoming article as "dupe" of old article that has way less traction and does not even show up on the front page (or on any following pages as well).

madengr 5y ago
The private business are using public right-of-ways and spectrum to carry their data, so they ought to be held to the same standard that makes cable television provide public access channels. If Google censors me, maybe I’ll dig up their cable that runs through the right-of-way on my private property.
- ABeeSea 5y ago
  Cable television does not have to provide public access channels. Broadcast providers do since they have formal leases with the FCC for spectrum which is a finite public good. It isn’t formal regulations; it’s basically terms in the lease agreement. The internet is a not scarce like TV spectrum was.
  - Taniwha 5y ago
    but cable TV's cables do use public streets and right of ways, negotiation of those franchise often include lease agreement terms that require the cable company to carry a city's public access channels .....
- lupire 5y ago
  Google (not counting Fiber, which is separate) doesn't have a cable on your property.
websites420 5y ago
A public option for social media is exactly what I want. Townsquare.us, run by the government, where all speech except that which is literally illegal is allowed. Supreme Court for challenges. No ads or tracking allowed. Post illegal content? Feds come knocking. Then, let FB/Twitter etc do whatever they want
- philg_jr 5y ago
  The only useful purpose of Facebook for me is using it as a somewhat modern phone book. It’s a great tool for tracking down old or new acquaintances and establishing a line of communication. It’s kind of what Facebook used to be before the newsfeed and like button. I wish there was an alternative to Facebook without the tracking and advertising, run by something not profit seeking. Maybe an organization like NPR or PBS?
- lupire 5y ago
  What's the point? We have plenty of options like that, but no one wants them. People want to go where other people are.
  - websites420 5y ago
    The point is that it settles, once and for all, the role of government in policing social media. If social media really is the replication of the public town square, then one that has the same operating model is called for. Doesn't matter if people want to go there. The point is that it exists, and the model is governed by the taxpayers.
    - shkkmo 5y ago
      How would the existence of a crappy government run social media site that nobody uses have any impact on the issue at stake here?
      - websites420 5y ago
        The issue at stake: governments telling private businesses what they can and can't host on their servers. Impact of a government social media: If you get banned from Facebook, you have the option to post your non-illegal content on townsquare.us. Therefore, your free speech rights are not being impacted. The right to speak is not the right to be heard by the audience of your choice.
tick_tock_tick 5y ago
People already tried that. Turns out everyone can decided not to do businesses with you good luck recreating every aspect of modern life.
- octopoc 5y ago
  Exactly. Telling people to build their own social network is like telling Rosa Parks to build her own bus line.
  - mfkp 5y ago
    Comparing politicians banned for violating social media ToS to Rosa Parks is... insensitive at best.
    - loveistheanswer 5y ago
      Dave Chappelle: if MLK had a sneaker deal with Nike https://youtu.be/4Doo9kOTuUk https://youtu.be/4Doo9kOTuUk
krapp 5y ago
> “Social media platforms have morphed into the town square” - sounds like they want government-run social media instead of privately-operated social media. What they want is for the government, run by their preferred party, to regulate privately-owned social media such that moderating their preferred political speech, however extreme or misleading it may be, becomes illegal.
- ashtonkem 5y ago
  Got it in one. The big tell here was Parler happily moderating away left wing voices and parody accounts despite being sold as a free speech platform.

by mfkp 5y ago

madengr 5y ago

The private business are using public right-of-ways and spectrum to carry their data, so they ought to be held to the same standard that makes cable television provide public access channels. If Google censors me, maybe I’ll dig up their cable that runs through the right-of-way on my private property.

ABeeSea 5y ago
Cable television does not have to provide public access channels. Broadcast providers do since they have formal leases with the FCC for spectrum which is a finite public good. It isn’t formal regulations; it’s basically terms in the lease agreement. The internet is a not scarce like TV spectrum was.
- Taniwha 5y ago
  but cable TV's cables do use public streets and right of ways, negotiation of those franchise often include lease agreement terms that require the cable company to carry a city's public access channels .....
lupire 5y ago
Google (not counting Fiber, which is separate) doesn't have a cable on your property.

websites420 5y ago

A public option for social media is exactly what I want. Townsquare.us, run by the government, where all speech except that which is literally illegal is allowed. Supreme Court for challenges. No ads or tracking allowed. Post illegal content? Feds come knocking. Then, let FB/Twitter etc do whatever they want

philg_jr 5y ago
The only useful purpose of Facebook for me is using it as a somewhat modern phone book. It’s a great tool for tracking down old or new acquaintances and establishing a line of communication. It’s kind of what Facebook used to be before the newsfeed and like button. I wish there was an alternative to Facebook without the tracking and advertising, run by something not profit seeking. Maybe an organization like NPR or PBS?
lupire 5y ago
What's the point? We have plenty of options like that, but no one wants them. People want to go where other people are.
- websites420 5y ago
  The point is that it settles, once and for all, the role of government in policing social media. If social media really is the replication of the public town square, then one that has the same operating model is called for. Doesn't matter if people want to go there. The point is that it exists, and the model is governed by the taxpayers.
  - shkkmo 5y ago
    How would the existence of a crappy government run social media site that nobody uses have any impact on the issue at stake here?
    - websites420 5y ago
      The issue at stake: governments telling private businesses what they can and can't host on their servers. Impact of a government social media: If you get banned from Facebook, you have the option to post your non-illegal content on townsquare.us. Therefore, your free speech rights are not being impacted. The right to speak is not the right to be heard by the audience of your choice.

tick_tock_tick 5y ago

People already tried that. Turns out everyone can decided not to do businesses with you good luck recreating every aspect of modern life.

octopoc 5y ago
Exactly. Telling people to build their own social network is like telling Rosa Parks to build her own bus line.
- mfkp 5y ago
  Comparing politicians banned for violating social media ToS to Rosa Parks is... insensitive at best.
  - loveistheanswer 5y ago
    Dave Chappelle: if MLK had a sneaker deal with Nike https://youtu.be/4Doo9kOTuUk https://youtu.be/4Doo9kOTuUk

krapp 5y ago

> “Social media platforms have morphed into the town square” - sounds like they want government-run social media instead of privately-operated social media. What they want is for the government, run by their preferred party, to regulate privately-owned social media such that moderating their preferred political speech, however extreme or misleading it may be, becomes illegal.

ashtonkem 5y ago
Got it in one. The big tell here was Parler happily moderating away left wing voices and parody accounts despite being sold as a free speech platform.