I usually look at it from the other end of the telescope - what would those companies be forced to do if they couldn't censor? Perhaps they'd be forced to platform conspiracy theorists, people who push ivermectin as an effective treatment for Covid, etc.
There is no such thing as "apply them consistently". Again, that is why we have a judicial branch. There will always be disagreements about what is a "consistent" application of a Terms of Service agreement.
-
-
(Unless you are proposing that the Terms of Service agreements cannot ever use the phrase 'in Twitter's sole discretion' and that Twitter will be held liable in a real court of law if the court disagrees with their application of the terms?)
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Right, but if they were legally required to do so then disagreements would be worked out by the legal system. This may be a terrible idea for reasons I've not thought of, but it's a compromise position which has occurred to me before.
-
You would still need to change the current regulations for that to occur, though. All Terms of Service contracts for social media companies currently include a number of "in [company]'s sole discretion", which means they would not be subject to trial court judgement.
- Show 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.