Of course it doesn't apply here. You're using a private service paid for by someone else. Their rules go. The first amendment doesn't mean you can't get kicked out of social clubs.
Duh...but it'd still be cool if those in charge would just...not ban people for voicing their opinions. We always complain about social media censorship even though we're no better over here.
That's because complaining about social media censorship is inherently silly as long as all those social media platforms are private businesses/services and not provided and controlled by the government.
It's not silly. We're gonna have to agree to disagree though. We just have different moral expectations of social platforms and you seem unable to move past "1A doesn't apply so they should censor everyone".
Moral expectations? It's their legal right as businesses in America. They get to decide what happens within their property, be it physical or digital. Forcing them to allow certain things to happen would be censorship.
It's not that they should censor everyone, it's that the alternative is itself government censorship. There is no functional difference between the government forcing a business to not let people say certain things in their establishment, and the government forcing a business to let people say certain things in their establishment.
If you come into my old timey soda pop shoppe and start breaking all the clearly posted "No Anachronism" signs by talking about how much you love cell phones and legally enforced desegregation, I have the right to boot you right out the door, even though there's no law against anachronism. It's my property. If you want to dictate what people can do in places they own, try a communist country instead.
Of course it doesn't apply here. You're using a private service paid for by someone else. Their rules go. The first amendment doesn't mean you can't get kicked out of social clubs.
Duh...but it'd still be cool if those in charge would just...not ban people for voicing their opinions. We always complain about social media censorship even though we're no better over here.
That's because complaining about social media censorship is inherently silly as long as all those social media platforms are private businesses/services and not provided and controlled by the government.
Also, it's really more of a time-out than a ban.
It's not silly. We're gonna have to agree to disagree though. We just have different moral expectations of social platforms and you seem unable to move past "1A doesn't apply so they should censor everyone".
I'm just using the same word that the mods use.
Moral expectations? It's their legal right as businesses in America. They get to decide what happens within their property, be it physical or digital. Forcing them to allow certain things to happen would be censorship.
It's not that they should censor everyone, it's that the alternative is itself government censorship. There is no functional difference between the government forcing a business to not let people say certain things in their establishment, and the government forcing a business to let people say certain things in their establishment.
If you come into my old timey soda pop shoppe and start breaking all the clearly posted "No Anachronism" signs by talking about how much you love cell phones and legally enforced desegregation, I have the right to boot you right out the door, even though there's no law against anachronism. It's my property. If you want to dictate what people can do in places they own, try a communist country instead.