It's not "technicalities;" these rights only exist in a legal sense because of the Constitutional protections. Remove those protections and the rule doesn't be

It's not "technicalities;" these rights only exist in a legal sense because of the Constitutional protections. Remove those protections and the rule doesn't become "Everyone gets to say whatever on Twitter;" they become "Twitter can tell everyone to pound sand, can lie, can commit fraud, can pretend to be other people and edit your messages in transit," etc. Without the law, it's might-makes-right and the corporations definitely control the wires and the databases. I argue that forcing the corporations to transit bits of various users infringes upon their rights more than the law traditionally demands (and morality requires, since the existence of a corporation doesn't immediately infringe anyone else's right to start their own website). > social media is different enough from "the press" that it should be treated accordingly How so?