4 ms·

In America,the first amendment protects you from government censorship. It doesn’t protect you from censorship that occurs naturally in society or the marketpla

In America,the first amendment protects you from government censorship. It doesn’t protect you from censorship that occurs naturally in society or the marketplace. Freedom of speech means you have freedom from the government. It does not mean you have freedom from societal consequences or that you’re entitled to a platform or audience. There are many forms of speech which society has decided to censor. We have decided to outlaw libel, slander, perjury, dissemination of child porn or classified info, etc., and we are familiar with many which cause immediate social or business repercussions (generally being an asshole, berating waitstaff, yelling at the top of your lungs in a quiet place, any kind of unwanted speech PN private property, etc.).

ctrlp 5y ago
What is your opinion of public/private partnerships? What would you say if the government pressures private organizations to censor individuals? Is that still 'private' censorship? What if partisan government officials take board seats or top management positions at these platforms, and vice versus? Your depiction of First Amendment protections seems incomplete if you don't account for the reality of government by proxy. It's no surprise that the state would externalize its censorship to circumvent civil liberties protections.
- seventytwo 5y ago
  There’s an infinite number of non-ideal permutations you could bring up. Those can be hammered out by the court system and legal precedent, or any issues can be worked by legislature or put back to the voters.
  - iammisc 5y ago
    Except the courts have failed to hammer them out due to apparently no one having standing. Even the government itself is apparently no longer allowed to bring anti trust complaints. Legislatures have been ignored recently with executive departments overriding even the federal supreme court in their attempts to exert control. And we all know how large swaths of goo voters and a surprisingly high number of democrat voters feel about the integrity of elections. Regardless of your views, this is a slow motion trainwreck
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
TeeMassive 5y ago
> In America,the first amendment protects you from government censorship. It doesn’t protect you from censorship that occurs naturally in society or the marketplace. Correct. But even in the marketplace there are limits for things like discrimination. > We have decided to outlaw libel, slander, perjury, dissemination of child porn or classified info Actually those are not constitutionally protected speech. This "censorship" does not come from social norms as you seem to imply, but by the government itself. > and we are familiar with many which cause immediate social or business repercussions The White House in a press conference said they were flagging posts to Facebook. This can make Facebook a government actor if they were forced, paid or coerced to do so (which they probably are) > (generally being an asshole, berating waitstaff, yelling at the top of your lungs in a quiet place, any kind of unwanted speech PN private property, etc.). You can't mute or block or unfollow someone in most normal social situations. This comparison is dubious at best.
raxxorrax 5y ago
> It doesn’t protect you from censorship that occurs naturally in society or the marketplace. I prefer to associate with those that don't have to be compelled by law to hold up the principle of free speech. Because following the others would only ensure that such rights would have never been implemented.

ctrlp 5y ago

What is your opinion of public/private partnerships? What would you say if the government pressures private organizations to censor individuals? Is that still 'private' censorship? What if partisan government officials take board seats or top management positions at these platforms, and vice versus? Your depiction of First Amendment protections seems incomplete if you don't account for the reality of government by proxy. It's no surprise that the state would externalize its censorship to circumvent civil liberties protections.

seventytwo 5y ago
There’s an infinite number of non-ideal permutations you could bring up. Those can be hammered out by the court system and legal precedent, or any issues can be worked by legislature or put back to the voters.
- iammisc 5y ago
  Except the courts have failed to hammer them out due to apparently no one having standing. Even the government itself is apparently no longer allowed to bring anti trust complaints. Legislatures have been ignored recently with executive departments overriding even the federal supreme court in their attempts to exert control. And we all know how large swaths of goo voters and a surprisingly high number of democrat voters feel about the integrity of elections. Regardless of your views, this is a slow motion trainwreck

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

TeeMassive 5y ago

> In America,the first amendment protects you from government censorship. It doesn’t protect you from censorship that occurs naturally in society or the marketplace. Correct. But even in the marketplace there are limits for things like discrimination. > We have decided to outlaw libel, slander, perjury, dissemination of child porn or classified info Actually those are not constitutionally protected speech. This "censorship" does not come from social norms as you seem to imply, but by the government itself. > and we are familiar with many which cause immediate social or business repercussions The White House in a press conference said they were flagging posts to Facebook. This can make Facebook a government actor if they were forced, paid or coerced to do so (which they probably are) > (generally being an asshole, berating waitstaff, yelling at the top of your lungs in a quiet place, any kind of unwanted speech PN private property, etc.). You can't mute or block or unfollow someone in most normal social situations. This comparison is dubious at best.

raxxorrax 5y ago

> It doesn’t protect you from censorship that occurs naturally in society or the marketplace. I prefer to associate with those that don't have to be compelled by law to hold up the principle of free speech. Because following the others would only ensure that such rights would have never been implemented.