4 ms·
Sorry to be so negative but this is a simply terrible article. It's a remedial lesson in free speech (and not a particularly articulate or entertaining one at t
by dschobel 17y ago
Sorry to be so negative but this is a simply terrible article. It's a remedial lesson in free speech (and not a particularly articulate or entertaining one at that) with the current context of social media added.
Anyone who cares about constitutional rights already will know more than this article can offer.
- hugothefrog 17y agoI quite agree. This is a very poor discussion of the ideas and concepts at hand. Its not even an 'introductory' level discussion; most of it is just plain uninformed. Personally, my first reading has led me to find the conclusions quite distasteful. I'm not sure a common carrier like Facebook should go taking sides, as the author seems to be suggesting. I consider there to be a significant difference between institutions (i.e. Facebook) taking sides and people (i.e. a host of a party). The internet, with a little searching, can supply far better arguments about free speech than this.
- swombat 17y agoI'm sorry that you feel that way. To be fair, I was not making any point about constitutional free speech, but rather, making a point about Facebook's involuntary editorial stand when they refuse to moderate hate groups on their system. It's also worth pointing out that many people do care about this discussion without being experts on constitutional rights (I guess I'm one of them, since I'm not american, so your constitution has little impact on me).