4 ms·
The relevant debate is not about "freedom of speech", but about "freedom to profit from running a platform for others' speech". I have no issue with substack a
by throwawaygh 5y ago
The relevant debate is not about "freedom of speech", but about "freedom to profit from running a platform for others' speech".
I have no issue with substack as a platform. My issue is with substack the Delaware C Corp.
- brigandish 5y agoIf one type of speech can be made money from but another type cannot by dint of being rendered a different class of speech then it’s hard to see how it’s free.
- throwawaygh 5y agoI don't understand what you are saying. Freedom to speak and freedom to profit from coordinating a platform for speech are different things. If you think "my ability to make money on social media platform capitalism" and "the original intent of the first amendment" are the same thing, then we have no common ground about what America is or means.
- brigandish 5y ago> If you think "my ability to make money on social media platform capitalism" and "the original intent of the first amendment" are the same thing, then we have no common ground about what America is or means. I don't. Thanks for letting me clear that up. > Freedom to speak and freedom to profit from coordinating a platform for speech are different things. Let's accept it because you've written it. What is it that you object to in either the freedom to speak or the freedom - via any means (freedom, right?) - to profit from it?