I would say I’m looking forward to all the “platforms need to censor themselves” people complaining every time they don’t agree with each particular act of self-censorship, but I’m not looking forward to it at all. It’s going to be super tedious and exhausting.
-
I’m looking forward to the platforms-need-to-not-censor crowd realizing that’s a nonsensical concept in a world with infinite content and finite user attention, at which point we can start discussing whether they are doing the best job they can running their censorship machines.
at the end of the day, no matter how you frame it, you are defending political censorship, and that is not only wrong but dangerous.
-
-
I’m defending editorial discretion, a well-established practice in this country. The radical view here is that Twitter should be compelled to speak in ways it does not want to. The courts have already ruled this unconstitutional.https://www.heritage.org/life/commentary/win-free-speech-supreme-court-says-california-cant-force-pro-life-centers-promote …
-
so we’re acknowledging they’re publishers then?
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
Political censorship is dangerous when it's the government doing the censoring - or say, bullying the media and threatening to throw reporters in jail. This is about free markets and companies may succeed or fail, but it's not the government...
-
you’re explaining the reason it’s *legal* for twitter to censor, not why it’s right
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.