4 ms·
A ban on a web site is usually driven by one or more violations of Terms of Service. Some of those Terms of Service are linked to criminal laws and the company
by mattbrewsbytes 4y ago
A ban on a web site is usually driven by one or more violations of Terms of Service. Some of those Terms of Service are linked to criminal laws and the company wants to protect itself from being prosecuted, liable to damages, etc.
I dislike the use of the words "freedom of speech" when it comes to social media/web sites because uneducated people seem to think a ban is a violation of the 1st US amendment. Which is even sillier when a website allows users globally. I doubt the conversations will suddenly change to "freedom to violate ToS" but I feel like there is a better wording than "freedom of speech".
If a camping website banned content about Bigfoot because they wanted to and you posted something about Bigfoot and got banned, its not a freedom of speech issue, its more like a "No Shirt, No, Shoes = No Service" issue.
- sascha_sl 4y agoLet's be completely honest. Twitter bans people based on metrics and 1-2 seconds of review per report (possibly by a human!). Trump got the white glove treatment of actually evaluating his compliance with the TOS, likely with an actual lawyer involved too.
- Gigachad 4y agoFreedom of speech is just a loose concept. The first amendment is an implementation of freedom of speech. It’s still accurate for a business to say they support and implement freedom of speech even if they are not legally obligated to.