Hate speech is not protected under the first amendment.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
Replying to @ILikeBonhoeffer @RobBowlinThe3rd and
Yes it is. Hate speech literally means nothing
3 replies 0 retweets 135 likes -
Replying to @Majaffey @ILikeBonhoeffer and
That is true, but his monetization is not protected. You can disagree with YT and their lack of a coherent policy, yet what they are doing is within their right.
2 replies 0 retweets 11 likes -
Replying to @xilefheinzel @Majaffey and
Not really. By law they have to be either a platform or a publisher, they can't be both. Right now they are marketing themselves as a platform, but if they decide to be a publisher instead, that means they are legally responsible for everything that goes up on their site.
6 replies 3 retweets 53 likes -
Replying to @KJ_Jeller @xilefheinzel and
Well, if they're legally a platform, then they do have to uphold free speech. If they're a publisher, then they don't. They need to clearly make this distinction.
0 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @KJ_Jeller @xilefheinzel and
Not in the First Amendment, but in the laws passed by CONGRESS.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
It's in the way communication is regulated from my understanding. You can be like the phone company, where you can't be held liable and take no responsibility for content, or like a publisher where you can be held liable, and take all responsibility for content.
-
-
Replying to @schwaka_ @KJ_Jeller and
Currently, social media falls under the first category legally, while they behave like they're in the second. They need to pick a side and take what comes with it instead of sitting in the middle and picking the parts they like from each side.
0 replies 0 retweets 2 likes - 10 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.