Government Forces Big Tech to Censor Americans Speech or Else

Twitter and Facebook have too much influence. They should be public utilities.

 

It's funny that you should bring up this topic. I have grown up with an internet that has rules of conduct on it. I've never really had a problem with it.

But, I don't agree that the government should force censorship for content that doesn't violate the law.

 

I never said that. You need to read it again

Which has what to do with what?

 

I think the pushback is in the other direction---the government doesn't want platform wide censorship of legal speech because employees of the owning company feel one way or the other.

 

ok, then we agree, I am good with that too, Trump is an idiot that sues everyone as a punishment, but hardly ever wins

it's how rich people punish poorer people... they know they won't win, but don't care

 

Government Forces Big Tech to Censor Americans Speech or Else
I've always regarded the First Amendment as sacred ground. But since Trump began his campaign of racism, bitterness, personal attacks on any & all opponents, & lying multiple times daily while in the White House, I've come to question the wisdom of continuing a First Amendment that is completely unchecked. Over the past four years, the amount of racist & hate speech found on the Internet has increased manyfold, & it's having a destructive effect on the thinking of many Americans--especially those with less education. Racism is an the rise for the first time in decades. Lying is becoming an accepted norm. A legal system that works for the wealthy & well placed, but failing to protect either the safety or the human rights of the lower classes or those with dark skin, is rapidly taking form under Trumpian & Republican rule. Our courts are being systematically packed with the most extreme radical conservatives imaginable by the Republican leadership working with Trump. Those new judges & justices will impact legal interpretations throughout the court system for decades to come, & erode established laws that protect valuable individual rights, especially those of women & citizens of color.

I don't know the best answer, but I increasingly feel the hate speech has to stop. Some manner of controls must be established to limit it & the damage it's doing to our youth & our society generally. I never thought I'd ever support such a move, but the hate mongers have already done a lot of damage. We can't allow it to continue.

 

Your trampling of the 1st amendment is very scary. But, tell me. Do you feel that your right to free speech, which allows you to comment about your ideas in public, is somehow not worthy of existance?

 

Oh, no. Did I misinterpret the thread? My bad.

 

It may not be illegal (yet), but there's a pretty big span between "not illegal" and "nothing wrong with". There's a lot wrong with it, morally, if you value the principle of free speech (which I view as a principle worth protecting which extends beyond our First Amendment restraints on government censorship).

 

Democrats want an Orwellian society.

 

The media has a responsibility to not obstruct free speech.

 

Hahahahaha!

 

I wish people had a better understanding of the role the media is supposed to fulfill in our society.

Ad it is right now, most Americans are uninformed, under-educated and just ignorant. Englishmen like Piers Morgan have a better grasp of these issues than the average American.

 

I think phone companies should follow big tech's lead and Institute their own speech policies. If another user reports that you said something offensive over the phone, your service can be temporarily or permanently interrupted. Hey it's their business!

 

Not a legal one. In fact the constitution says it can say whatever it wants to say.

 

It should be illegal for Facebook to censor speech.

I think Facebook is one of the biggest tools, if not the biggest, that a political campaign has at its disposal. I know it is the best tool to exercise our right to assemble.

Denying use of this tool can seriously damage a political campaign, or an individual or group's right to assemble. In much the same way that denial of use of railroads to one political persuasion of the 1800's would have given the other a huge advantage.

The same would have been true if the inventors of electricity, telephones, airlines, etc., attempted to deny use. It would be using an edge that a recent technological innovation gives to influence our political representation, which is not in line with the founders' vision.

 

Of course not. I share your concerns over the First Amendment. It is sacred, & should always be observed & protected. But I am also concerned about the spread of hate speech & general hatreds by multi-media & the internet. That is a threat to the country as a whole--not just free speech--not just the First Amendment. Also, if hate comes in & destroys our social & cultural unity, or our government with its Constitution, where will the First Amendment be then?

 

No one has to agree to an NDA. Personally I would never accept pay to stay silent on anything.

 

It is because Liberalism have been hijacked by Communism,

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...ame-comintern-communist-international.568189/

 

me either, but lot of republican in this admin did

 

Social media companies are not the town square. The town square is owned by the public. Social media companies are private for-profit businesses.

 

Exactly.

Everybody KNOWS that those platforms AREN'T the "town square".

Anybody who has an issue with Twitter or Facebook's "policies" is always free to stop using the platform (or invent their own social media site).

^Problem solved.

 

If they're going to censor people then they're publishers, not a platforms and can therefore be sued. The phone companies don't censor people. Liberals wouldn't be cheering censorship if it was being done to their team. It is being done to the Left. A Jacobin video with Ana Kasparian was removed by Facebook yesterday. Pro Palestinian accounts have been censored many times. Same with anti war groups. The social media companies have too much power.

 

Twitter and Facebook are monopolies.

 

Publishers censor all the time. Do you think a newspaper is required to print every letter-to-the-editor or sound-off style entry? No.

The answer to censorship by social media companies is for you to use different social media companies. Or none at all. Social media is not an entitlement.