Tom wrote on Jan 11, 2021, 15:08:
Tomas wrote on Jan 11, 2021, 15:00:
I understand what you're trying to say, but what you said is just wrong. It's 100% censorship, but done by entities other than government. Sure, it's legal, but it's not necessarily good for our republic.
So... you think it would be better for our republic if companies did not have the freedom to decide their own terms of service within the constraints of the law?
No, that's not what I think. I love that companies are able to have their own opinions and I do not think any of them acted illegally in any way.
However, I do think it is of value to consider that technology has changed the landscape in both how we communicate and how we get information. I believe there is conversation that needs to take place at this point to find what is best for society as a whole. When we lump everything that has happened politically over the last year into two baskets (democrats and republicans) its easy to make broad-stroke declarations about specific points, but those strokes do little to clarify what is really taking place. Suppression of speech is something that alarms me regardless of who is being suppressed. Just because it is legal doesn't necessarily mean it's a good thing.
Here's the statement from the ACLU lawyers - I think it's worth reading and thinking about.
“We understand the desire to permanently suspend him now, but it should concern everyone when companies like Facebook and Twitter wield the unchecked power to remove people from platforms that have become indispensable for the speech of billions — especially when political realities make those decisions easier,” said Kate Ruane, ACLU senior legislative counsel, in a statement. “President Trump can turn to his press team or Fox News to communicate with the public, but others — like the many Black, Brown, and LGBTQ activists who have been censored by social media companies — will not have that luxury.”