Facebook, Apple, YouTube/Google, Spotify are ostensibly 4 diverse independent actors acting together. Coordinated corporate action like this is a serious problem that has nothing whatsoever to do w/ the various peculiarities of the target here. What are we seeing? What is this?https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1026534085634793473 …
-
Hospitals could and did. They passed laws to prevent it. Doctors take an oath against it. That's why this is such a shitty comp: Are you suggesting that the gov't pass laws to guarantee a platform of the speakers choosing? Should techies have an oath like the Hippocratic oath?
It might be nice if the people who worked for social media companies took some kind of professional oath not to let their personal political views bias who has access to the most important communications tech in the modern world.
-
-
What would be the punishment for failing to adhere to their oath? Should the government intervene and revoke licenses to interact with the public, if the techie violated this oath? And who judges when this is happening?
-
I guess it could work a lot like codes in other professions -- being disbarred, losing a medical license, being found guilty of scientific misconduct aren't things the gov't enforces directly; qualified peers do.
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Other than the fact that it would be economic suicide.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Geoffrey, they are private corporations that act in the best interests of their shareholders. They can decide who does or doesn’t get to use their platforms.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Jones is a fear mongering conspiracy theorist who claims the govt is making people gay and sandy hook is fake.a woman went to jail for threatening parents of a kid who died bc of what he said.he HAPPENS to be GOP.unless ur saying his claims r GOP? I sure hope not.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
People like Alex Jones are not good for free speech, because he attacks people and attempts to silence them and censor them - Facebook, Google and co. have just taken the first steps in a long-needed attempt to respond to it.
-
Alex Jones has attacked and hurt the Sandyhook victims for years, with no repercussions. His slander on them is censorious in nature, because he's been rallying others to ignore them and attempt to silence them. He's not the man you want to defend.
End of conversation
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.