and hate speech is still hate speech. I would argue we should be even stricter on that. Certain people should be banned for that
-
-
Replying to @DerekGT
You either uphold freedom of expression or not. Can't say everyone except universities & ppl who use what I think of as hate speech
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
I think freedom of expression you're advocating is a company's right to certain image, not individuals' right to speak anywhere
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DerekGT
I don't support individual's right to speak anywhere. That would be disastrous. I support free exchange of ideas in some places.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
by "anywhere" I mean publicly. I'm not saying Joe Blow can speak on your blog, or my twitter, or anyone's private anything.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DerekGT
Well, it is only private organisations & companies we are talking about.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
if someone wants to be racist, they start a private organization, etc.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DerekGT
Yes. Groups can focus on what they want to , hear from who they want and not from who they don't.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
wouldn't it be more true to the principle of freedom of speech to disallow banning of speakers? That's what I'm saying
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DerekGT
No. We cannot force private companies to allow freedom of speech & uphold their own freedom of expression.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
They must be able to choose which speech represents their company *or* that freedom of speech does.
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.