I disagree. Freedom of expression does not, and should not, force/oblige private companies to offer platforms to those they'd rather not.https://twitter.com/knwledgepursuer/status/807123394902704128 …
-
-
We agree. Platforms cannot be forced to include every view. They must be able to pick.
-
We can then evaluate them on how they do so. Freedom of speech is one criteria.
-
eg, a science conference cld reasonably insist that only scientists speak.
-
Freedom of speech is less important than relevance in this situation.
-
However, we might want freedom of speech on social media forums & pick ones which offer that.
-
Universities could offer platforms only to people with qualifications & expertise on topics.
-
Few people would complain that a platform to talk abt the economy not offered to everyone.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
A good summary. So Helen, for you would that include opposing an 'ideological screening' test 4 immigrants?
-
No. I don't see how that relates.
-
Wouldn't denying permanent residency 2 say a non-violent fundamentalist muslim not be punishment 4 their views
-
Yes. Lets deny people access to liberal democracies if they're likely to vote against liberal democracy.
-
They can still talk! Wouldn't ban books, talks, tv etc.
-
Couldn't the same argument be made about no-platforming?
-
You could compare countries to platforms, yes. Not sure it works coz different factors.
-
But note, I don't support freedom of speech everywhere, anyway. It wld make workplaces & schools hell.
- 46 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.