Virtually nobody claims Alex Jones had a formal legal right to access any of the platforms he was banished from. But that's exactly the issue. He was effectively vanquished from the public square -- and there's no legal recourse, checks and balances, or oversight mechanism
-
-
Replying to @mtracey
We shouldn't be reinforcing the idea that Facebook, YouTube, etc are the "public square" and promote actual public spaces instead. An argument that they're de facto public isn't convincing, maybe you're arguing they should be appropriated and made actually public (nationalized)?
5 replies 2 retweets 49 likes -
Replying to @autarken
Why isn't it convincing that they constitute a de facto public square? They are platforms on which a huge percentage of public discourse takes place. They grant entry to anyone. They're enormously influential. The characterization seems totally apt.
15 replies 5 retweets 81 likes -
then they should be nationalized. if they will have the power of governments going forward, and there’s zero indication they won’t, then the governed should be in charge of how they work
3 replies 0 retweets 29 likes -
Replying to @krummicorn @autarken
I am very much open to proposals for some form of public ownership
20 replies 0 retweets 38 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
What "consistency" have I abandoned? When have I ever expressed opposition to public ownership?
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @mtracey @IcebucketPete and
Because taking away the fruits of free enterprise, and reclamation of private industry for nationalized use is anathema to anyone consist with core GOP tenants. How is that not glaringly obvious to you?
3 replies 0 retweets 5 likes
I have never in my life subscribed to "core GOP tenets"
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.