3 ms·
A court ordering for social media accounts to be blocked is censorship, no question about that. If there are "election rules" that regulate what can be posted
by welshwelsh 2y ago
A court ordering for social media accounts to be blocked is censorship, no question about that.
If there are "election rules" that regulate what can be posted online, that's censorship. Even if people are inciting violence or formenting revolution, banning them is censorship.
Most governments participate in censorship, and most people are OK with some level of censorship. But Brazil's constitution guarantees freedom of speech without censorship, so their courts have no business issuing orders to censor social media.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> A court ordering for social media accounts to be blocked is censorship, no question about that This is a bad litmus test. Courts order fraudsters to stop doing fraud all the time. It's censorship. But it's acceptable censorship, even in America where we have a uniquely-potent First Amendment.
- makeitdouble 2y ago> Brazil's constitution guarantees freedom of speech without censorship That can't work in reality though. So at best it can only be a theoretical ideal, merely a guideline for practical legislation. Same way French constitution has equal rights for all citizen baked into its constitution for more than a century.
- carlosjobim 2y agoYou are down voted by people who don't understand what the word censorship means. The problem is that the censors don't call it "censorship" anymore, for vanity reasons. Leading us into this dumb modern discourse. The same thing with the word "propaganda", that is misinterpreted to always mean something bad. Each day the popular vocabulary shrinks more and more, until we're back at cave man levels. Tower of Babylon.
- simianparrot 2y ago[flagged]