If you're really LGBT-friendly, @YouTube (@TeamYouTube), how does Pastor Stephen Anderson have 120k followers on your platform? Hell, how does someone advocating for the death of all gays even still have a channel? (channel: sanderson1611) https://www.youtube.com/user/sanderson1611/ …https://twitter.com/Atheist_T_Girl/status/1135608774016872449 …
-
0:19 -
How does he not get shutdown for hate speech like Alex Jones? It can't be the "Mario star" first amendment defense since YouTube is not a federal or government agency. Why do we allow the lowest common denominators to exist with a tax exemption?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Markph84 @holykoolaid and
Because your opinion means zip to others’ freedom of expression. It’s a principle you don’t seem to understand or value
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @FightTheCensors @holykoolaid and
Also, when did YouTube become a federal agency? If I remember correctly it means the federal government cannot infringe upon freedom of religion, speech, & press. Last I heard, YouTube is a citizen owned platform therefore they may choose to do whatever they like.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Markph84 @holykoolaid and
You’re misinformed that’s all. Free speech is a civic duty to both exercise and tolerate from others. It’s a social compact
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @FightTheCensors @holykoolaid and
The first amendment does not apply to platforms like YouTube or Twitter and it's not a civic duty or social compact. It only guarantees protection from the government and law enforcement, not corporations. If you don't follow a company's policy then they have the right to deny
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Markph84 @holykoolaid and
That’s why they’ll be broken up on the basis of collusion and monopoly. Antitrust laws forbid this kind of constitution-subverting activity
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @FightTheCensors @holykoolaid and
Discrimination by race is not the same as controlling hate speech and misinformation. Plus, I doubt these creators were ever slaves or lynched or sent to prison because of their melanoma content. They are not oppressed and there are plenty of other platforms to express themselves
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Markph84 @holykoolaid and
Discrimination is illegal based on any affiliation or association. Hate speech is legal. Controlling speech is illegal. Yes, big differences.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Look, these platforms are going to have to come together and come up with a code that all of them have to abide by just like news media outlets (the ethical and moral standards code). Is restricting a slippery slope? Sure, but that's for them to decide without govt oversite.
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.