So, you think a government official painting a target on a newspaper's advertisers is cool, since it's not legally state action? Free speech won't be of much use if angry mobs can run the press out of business.
-
-
What’s more anti-speech: Announcing on a major network that a particular religion is antithetical to America, or Boycotting the sponsors of the show that said that? Which is more corrosive of the values you speak of?
-
So, one side is making an argument, the other side is trying to end the arguing. You back the latter and call it free speech? How Orwellian.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
What exactly do you mean by “efforts?” Because if you mean people tweeting at businesses to pay more attention to what the people they sponsor are saying, then I don’t see the problem really. If you’re saying the problem is that it’s working, that a different issue
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Individuals have a right to put pressure on sponsors. That’s part of the marketplace.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Why should companies be free from critiques of their choices? Don’t consumers have the right to do business with companies that they feel support their values? Is that not freedom of association?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.