Social media companies are more than just private companies now. They are overtly used to sway political opinions. That's why Twitter now has to testify in front of congress over the issue of shadow banning conservatives.
But if you want to act as if your service is a utility, don't get mad when certain people use it in ways you don't like. It's like a power plant getting mad about a certain group over the the way they're using the electricity at home.
True, they’re way bigger than what they once were. So now what? We set thresholds for when regulations kick in? Seems like a reasonable topic of discussion. But antithetical to the typical libertarian trope.
Freedom of speech is an Enlightenment value. The 1st Amendment is a manifestation of that value. There seem to be a lot of people who are totally against censorship by public institutions and totally in favor of censorship via powerful private institutions. That doesn't seem like a particularly principled philosophical position.
I’m not “for” that, at all. But how do you mandate that an organization behave according to enlightenment principles? To do so requires some sort of authority, somewhere, saying either do this or else. Is that the worst thing? No, probably not. We use the rule of law for all sorts of things. It’s just that the rightwing has fought for private organizations to behave as they please when it fits their ideology.
So no, I don’t think private organizations should censor anyone, unless those people advocate violence. Alex Jones encouraged violence and otherwise violated terms of service so he set himself up for getting shut down. Too bad so sad.
That’s the thing, Adobe is fundamentally right but then how do you compel organizations or individuals to behave in a certain way without excessively intruding?
Well, a Constitution and laws make for a good start. We have an imperfect system that’s still better than nearly all tested alternatives. If a consequence is that dudes like Alex Jones get censored now and then...so be it.
Liberals are able to make private entities make changes through boycotts. Conservative boycotts don't work because conservatives can't wrap their head around giving up something they like for the common good.
Good points in there. I’m not necessarily defending the decision by private companies to censor the guy, as much as I’m pointing out that conservatives speak vehemently about not regulating businesses, but often get touchy about it when businesses do things they don’t like.
So four private companies banned InfoWars simultaneously, and that's totally not censorship. Yeah, right. Free speech, sure, as long as it's the correct opinion. Just like before the Iraq invasion ALL private news outlets were ratcheting up public opinion in favor of the war. Mark my words, when they develop AI automatic censorship, it wouldn't even 'private company's decision'. It would be 'sorry, our AI is giving false positives bans because it thinks you're a adversary's bot, it is the algorithm's decision, not our position'.