Even a private entity can have public obligations with respect to the regulation of speech. Twitter would be among those entities.
-
-
-
Whether Twitter is right or wrong to ban a given user, the alleged inapplicability of the first amendment is a poor framing of the question.
-
Concerns about protecting free speech don't simply vanish because the actor quashing it is a corporate entity instead of a government entity
-
Unless you're prepared to accept that corporate entities are entitled to total, unrestrained dominion over the speech of their subjects.
-
To be clear, I'm not defending Milo or anybody else, just urging a better framework from which to assess these issues.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
And everyone has equal access to sign up for the services.
-
Whereas, everyone doesn't have equal access to employment at a corporation. So the speech implications differ.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
It's perfectly coherent to posit differing speech-regulation obligations among publicly accessible forums versus closed forums.
-
The freeness of speech in a private chat system among corporate employees is different than in a public social media forum.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Clearly Twitter is within its legal rights to ban whomever it wants, I never disputed that. I'm making a normative comment.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
A handful of corps now control the wires upon which 'speech' now travels, so yes. Also corps/gov, not a big distinction any longer.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
doesn't twitter have a 1a right to limit speech on its private platform?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
which quasi public forums?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Cash for Speech still has a big lobby.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
but Marsh v Alabama was about the State curtailing speech using trespassing statute, not sure how it applies here
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
does 1A Include targeted hate speech that incites others to join in as in mob mentality of hate against some1 due 2 color/creed?
- 2 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.