4 ms·

The irony in your comment is you seem to only be able to recognize a problem when it impacts people you deem to be victims and.or agree with politically, but wh

by syshum 5y ago

The irony in your comment is you seem to only be able to recognize a problem when it impacts people you deem to be victims and.or agree with politically, but when it impacts people you disagree with it is "we can disagree on those premises" Censorship by these platforms is real, ever present and has been highlighted for many years by many groups only to be meet with "mah private platform". People like me has been warning that censorship is never the solution, but as usual as long as the people being censored where deemed "wrong thinkers" it is perfectly fine

kspacewalk2 5y ago
Right, it is met with "mah private platform" because it is a private platform, and this is a good argument.
- Covzire 5y ago
  I wonder how proponents of this argument would feel if another industry was squarely in the hands of the right, like education. Let's say all the best educations were in private colleges and they didn't tolerate much in the way of left wing speech. Everyone knows that 3 SV companies have a politically charged uber-monopoly that they are exploiting to silence the political enemies of the DNC and increasingly enemies of the CCP. Everyone.
- textgel 5y ago
  No it isn't. We've had years of progressives screaming that private companies aren't allowed to just do as they please simply because they are private. You aren't permitted to suddenly become an ardent liberty advocate simply because it suits you when you've been demanding regulation and authoritarianism previously.
aww_dang 5y ago
>when it impacts people you disagree with it is "we can disagree on those premises" I'm not sure what gave you that impression. For clarity's sake I'm opposed to censorship across the board. If information is incorrect or misleading, it should be exposed in the clear light of day. I was trying to avoid opening up a partisan quagmire.

by syshum 5y ago

kspacewalk2 5y ago

Right, it is met with "mah private platform" because it is a private platform, and this is a good argument.

Covzire 5y ago
I wonder how proponents of this argument would feel if another industry was squarely in the hands of the right, like education. Let's say all the best educations were in private colleges and they didn't tolerate much in the way of left wing speech. Everyone knows that 3 SV companies have a politically charged uber-monopoly that they are exploiting to silence the political enemies of the DNC and increasingly enemies of the CCP. Everyone.
textgel 5y ago
No it isn't. We've had years of progressives screaming that private companies aren't allowed to just do as they please simply because they are private. You aren't permitted to suddenly become an ardent liberty advocate simply because it suits you when you've been demanding regulation and authoritarianism previously.

aww_dang 5y ago

>when it impacts people you disagree with it is "we can disagree on those premises" I'm not sure what gave you that impression. For clarity's sake I'm opposed to censorship across the board. If information is incorrect or misleading, it should be exposed in the clear light of day. I was trying to avoid opening up a partisan quagmire.