4 ms·

> it's not censorship when a private company does it on their own platform. It's legal, but it's still censorship. And 'censorable' is about the ability to be

> it's not censorship when a private company does it on their own platform. It's legal, but it's still censorship. And 'censorable' is about the ability to be censored, not necessarily current censorship. I do not think it benefits the people to have censorable networks because every tool eventually gets used. We're better off with the phone company not being able to moderate our speech. > But that's the point, it's only the extreme things that get banned. Not at all. It's not the slightest bit extreme to say men shouldn't take spots in women's sports but it is censored on most platforms. They'll take your NYT (for example, but far from the only one) comments taken down if you say this, no matter how polite you are. > You're worried about missing that "some politician took bribes or that a public policy isn't actually evidence based" but absolutely nobody is moderating those messages. That's 100% a straw man. The entire media suppressed the Hunter Biden laptop story specifically because it was about politicians and their family taking bribes. And the government cooperated with FB (and others) to identify Covid misinformation, but the definition of misinformation has changed. It used to be censor-worthy to say Covid came from Wuhan and now that's the accepted likely origin. > Private moderation of extreme views is a free speech protection afforded to the private owners of spaces. End of story. In your house, yes. In your mall, in California, no. As you open a place up to the public and trade them the right to be there as FB does in exchange for advertising to you you give away a lot of your rights to control people's actions on your property.

crazygringo 4y ago
> They'll take your NYT (for example, but far from the only one) comments taken down if you say this, no matter how polite you are. That's factually untrue. I read comments in the NYT and come across comments like that all the time. Their moderation policy is very clear, and it's not what you describe. And your examples about Biden and Wuhan are red herrings and have nothing to do with this conversation. > In your house, yes. In your mall, in California, no. That's factually untrue. In a mall, in California, you absolutely can moderate speech. You can't kick people out based on protected classes, but you have the right as a business owner to kick people out based on any other reason. As you need to be able to, as people can be disruptive. And extreme speech that is clearly audible/visible to others absolutely falls in the category of disruptive. A shop in a mall is not a public square, nor should it be.
- LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
  > In a mall, in California, you absolutely can moderate speech. [...] As you need to be able to, as people can be disruptive. We're talking about people not being disruptive but the owner simply not liking their opinions. In these examples the people are speaking nicely, not yelling, not waving signs, not blocking other shoppers, etc. > And your examples about Biden and Wuhan are red herrings and have nothing to do with this conversation. These stories and even private discussions about them were censored despite not being harmful or even incorrect, merely because they might support the opinion of a MAGA voter. That's exactly the issue here - non-harmful speech that someone else feels must be stopped.

crazygringo 4y ago

> They'll take your NYT (for example, but far from the only one) comments taken down if you say this, no matter how polite you are. That's factually untrue. I read comments in the NYT and come across comments like that all the time. Their moderation policy is very clear, and it's not what you describe. And your examples about Biden and Wuhan are red herrings and have nothing to do with this conversation. > In your house, yes. In your mall, in California, no. That's factually untrue. In a mall, in California, you absolutely can moderate speech. You can't kick people out based on protected classes, but you have the right as a business owner to kick people out based on any other reason. As you need to be able to, as people can be disruptive. And extreme speech that is clearly audible/visible to others absolutely falls in the category of disruptive. A shop in a mall is not a public square, nor should it be.

LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
> In a mall, in California, you absolutely can moderate speech. [...] As you need to be able to, as people can be disruptive. We're talking about people not being disruptive but the owner simply not liking their opinions. In these examples the people are speaking nicely, not yelling, not waving signs, not blocking other shoppers, etc. > And your examples about Biden and Wuhan are red herrings and have nothing to do with this conversation. These stories and even private discussions about them were censored despite not being harmful or even incorrect, merely because they might support the opinion of a MAGA voter. That's exactly the issue here - non-harmful speech that someone else feels must be stopped.