> If nobody can define what 'hate speech' really is and if the definition changes person to person, then you're arguing for the wrong reasons ... Hate-speech

> If nobody can define what 'hate speech' really is and if the definition changes person to person, then you're arguing for the wrong reasons ... Hate-speech is like pornography. You know it when you see it. Of course one man's "pornography" can be another man's "erotica". But social media companies have the right to decide what they think is pornography vs. what is "erotica", and what they then share or not with all their customers. Why are we not complaining that Facebook muzzles the free speech of people who want to spread pornography online? Hate-speech is similar in concept to pornography but far more dangerous. It directly increases the risk of violence. Should social-media companies be forbidden from blocking pornography on their site?