Companies are supposed to be entities like persons. I can violate your free speech rights by refusing to publish your book. I don’t see why a company cannot do the same.
But the section 230 bit is really interesting since companies can only declare immunity from liability if they are a publishing platform and do not editorialize… yet censorship is editorializing so they should be liable for the rot on their platforms. They want it both ways, and get it because they’re all (companies, politicians, judges, etc) controlled by the same oligarchs.
My X account is still banned.
Wow sorry to hear that. I was wondering where you went as I haven’t seen your posts in awhile.
Must have been hitting all the bullseyes.
Same. No appeal. Basically a Twitter death sentence over some words.
Isnt it weird how companies have to obey the law when it comes to X, Y, and Z…
But when it comes to your free speech rights, they say
“oh companies can do whatever they want, because the first amendment limits what governement can do, not what companies can do”
And im like,
“who tf is talking about the first amendment? Im talking about my free speech rights, which exist independently of the constitution…
Companies don’t get to violate my free speech rights any more than they get to violate any other right.
Companies are supposed to be entities like persons. I can violate your free speech rights by refusing to publish your book. I don’t see why a company cannot do the same.
But the section 230 bit is really interesting since companies can only declare immunity from liability if they are a publishing platform and do not editorialize… yet censorship is editorializing so they should be liable for the rot on their platforms. They want it both ways, and get it because they’re all (companies, politicians, judges, etc) controlled by the same oligarchs.
wow you must be worse than tommy robinson as even he got back on last week lol