Look, Zuck is cancer fine, and he needs to be investigated for Anti-monopoly practices and a host of other things.
But in this specific case, Trump is in the wrong. You cannot force a private business to serve you if they do not want to, and the president of suing a private business for not serving you is awful. Do you really want the government or the courts forcing private business to serve people they choose not to?
You are wrong here. Facebook and Twitter et al are publicly traded companies and they were set up as PLATFORMS, to be the modern "public square". This is why they have protections under 230 so they cannot be liable for what people say providing it is legal.
They HAVE to allow all voices to be heard if it's legal, and yet there are clearly illegal tweets on there which they don't remove while silencing the voices of of perfectly legal speech. Not just politics of course, they censored Doctors talking about Ivermectin or vaccine damage.
While publishers can of course decide what they allow to be published they haven't yet been designated so, and are still under 'platform' 230 protection. So they can be sued under that designation.
There is also the fact that they conspired with other to silence people and that I think would come under racketeering/RICO.
Phone companies cannot just cut off your service if they don't like your conversations or who you call even though they too are private companies.
Anyone who has stock in Facebook and Twitter should also sue for damaging their stock values imo.
Again, being it is irrelevant to their status as a private company. Would you except that argument if the left government tried to tell oil companies who they could and could not sell to, because they are publicly traded companies?
The fact that these companies are too big is indeed a problem and should be addressed under anti-trust and antimonopoly rules but it is irrelevant to their authority and rights as a private company.
Has a private company in America they have rules which they are public about and open with and if you break them they are removed.
The government should not be dictating to private companies who they can and cannot serve. you donβt get to only have conservative values when it is convenient and affects the left.
If you can actually prove they are operating as an agent of the government, then you might have a weak argument. But you canβt base a lawsuit on an undemonstrated conspiracy theory.
Look, Zuck is cancer fine, and he needs to be investigated for Anti-monopoly practices and a host of other things.
But in this specific case, Trump is in the wrong. You cannot force a private business to serve you if they do not want to, and the president of suing a private business for not serving you is awful. Do you really want the government or the courts forcing private business to serve people they choose not to?
You are wrong here. Facebook and Twitter et al are publicly traded companies and they were set up as PLATFORMS, to be the modern "public square". This is why they have protections under 230 so they cannot be liable for what people say providing it is legal.
They HAVE to allow all voices to be heard if it's legal, and yet there are clearly illegal tweets on there which they don't remove while silencing the voices of of perfectly legal speech. Not just politics of course, they censored Doctors talking about Ivermectin or vaccine damage.
While publishers can of course decide what they allow to be published they haven't yet been designated so, and are still under 'platform' 230 protection. So they can be sued under that designation.
There is also the fact that they conspired with other to silence people and that I think would come under racketeering/RICO.
Phone companies cannot just cut off your service if they don't like your conversations or who you call even though they too are private companies.
Anyone who has stock in Facebook and Twitter should also sue for damaging their stock values imo.
Again, being it is irrelevant to their status as a private company. Would you except that argument if the left government tried to tell oil companies who they could and could not sell to, because they are publicly traded companies?
The fact that these companies are too big is indeed a problem and should be addressed under anti-trust and antimonopoly rules but it is irrelevant to their authority and rights as a private company.
Has a private company in America they have rules which they are public about and open with and if you break them they are removed.
The government should not be dictating to private companies who they can and cannot serve. you donβt get to only have conservative values when it is convenient and affects the left.
Can governments dictate to private companies who they can and cannot censor?
The point is that facebook is operating as an agent for the government. Your private company argument is not relevant.
If you can actually prove they are operating as an agent of the government, then you might have a weak argument. But you canβt base a lawsuit on an undemonstrated conspiracy theory.