PragerU just tried to sue YouTube over this 
-
-
Replying to @RationalDis
No, that was a lawsuit over discriminatory practice.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
-
-
Replying to @andrewdoyle_com
You realize that YouTube doesn't own them a microphone or a platform, right? You literally just said that no one thinks that's what free speech means.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @RationalDis
They’re not claiming they are owed a platform. They are claiming that a company offering a public service cannot legally discriminate against people on the basis of political affiliation. If you don’t understand the difference, I can’t help you.
3 replies 0 retweets 16 likes -
Replying to @andrewdoyle_com
So you think they are owed a platform because of their political affiliation
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @andrewdoyle_com
Then it's okay for YouTube to deny PragerU access to their platform & their microphone?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @RationalDis
Depends on your view. Perhaps you think it’s okay for them to deny their services to gays as well. I’m just pointing out that this is a discrimination lawsuit.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
But PragerU frames it as a "free speech" issue. How is YouTube "violating their right to free speech"? Can you define what freedom of speech is?
-
-
Replying to @RationalDis
It is a free speech issue if they are discriminating on the basis on political affiliation. The key word here is “discrimination”.
4 replies 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @andrewdoyle_com @RationalDis
Do you believe YouTube should be able to offer a public service but reject gays, people of colour and conservatives?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes - 15 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.