| curl-6 said: Yeah free speech is more of an authoritarian/libertarian thing than a left/right thing. I fall somewhere in the middle on it. On the one hand, I don't like the far left's increasingly harassing those who don't share their views and using "I'm offended by that" as a way to try to shut down differences of opinion. On the other hand, free speech does not mean freedom from accountability. If I were to start openly preaching that "black people are subhuman and women shouldn't have the right to vote" social media platforms or my job would be right to deplatform/fire me respectively if they don't want to be associated with that kind of rubbish. I mean, one could argue that talking on the phone is free speech, but what if the conversation I'm having it hiring a hitman to kill someone? I may not have pulled the trigger myself, just exercising my "freedom of speech", but I am still responsible for the resulting murder. |
First of all, I agree partially. I want to go in more detail on some points or put a bit of a different perspective.
Hiring a hitman is a crime, and we can agree that platform holders should not support crimes. It is basically as simple as that. The current blocking of Trump and Trump fans at least partially falls into that basket, as they were inciting violence.
The problem I have with that, that I don't see a consistent line or rule, just some decision the company makes. That is more along the line you say above, if someone has the right not to be associated with that rubbish. These are profit oriented companies, it is possible to pressure them. Without clear rules about what they disassociate from, they could next be pressured by Creationists to remove content about evolution. Or content creators that talk against neoliberalism. I do fear that quite a bit.
