4 ms·
There are few facts on which Pruneyard relies that are completely at odds with the attempts to apply it to social media moderation: 1. The speech being conduct
by jcranmer 4y ago
There are few facts on which Pruneyard relies that are completely at odds with the attempts to apply it to social media moderation:
1. The speech being conducted was agreed by everybody to not be disruptive.
2. It was agreed by all parties that no one could confuse the speech of the protesters with the speech of the shopping center.
For social media concerns, these two facts do not describe the actual situation, and so Pruneyard is not appropriate precedent.
- EarlKing 4y agoSpeech that isn't disruptive isn't really worth anything. There's little point in saying things people already agree with. It's saying the things that people don't want to hear that has real value. If you can't say the things that people don't want to hear because they are "disruptive" then you don't really have the freedom of speech.