By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
EnricoPallazzo said:

I think part of the problem in this discussion, as it is usual, is liberals not understanding what conservatives want, and conservatives not understanding what liberals want.

Agree 100% a solution based on a proper law will open a can of worms/pandora box and it is the worst solution ever.

I am pretty sure Musk and most of the people that would like to have free speech on twitter and reddit are not against having community rules. People dont want it to become 4chan (although I see some value in 4chan) where people call each other (insert here word that cannot be spoken today) or talk about murdering people to install a comunist state, rage ethnical cleansing to have a white state only, etc. And to have fairness of treatment and not double standards from "fact checkers" or closing of community/members matters.

Anyway, I dont think the government should jump in to regulate it, in general it only causes more trouble than solutions. The solution is much simpler than that, is people that do not agree with the platform to just stop using it and look for solutions elsewhere, is possible. If all famous people that complain about twitter (including Musk) closed their account and opened a new one in another platform it would bring millions of people to other places.

Of course.. if those other options are allowed to exist. Unfortunately, and this is a very direct criticism of the radical left actions, some try to shut down those options. 

"You dont like it here, build your own platform"

"Hey this platform you created do not follow what I believe, shut it down"

"You did not shut it down? Lets presure government and banks to not allow it to exist, lets cut your financials ties so we strangle you financially"

To be honest I think this all sucks because it only creates more division and I would prefer everyone to be able to expose it's ideas everywhere with no fear of retaliation or cancelling. But a divided world is a reality and I think there is no coming back unfortunately.

Well, at least you agree that the government shouldn't be telling websites who they can or cannot ban.

@Bold. I don't seem to recall liberals saying the government should ban Parler or Truth Social or Gab or 4-Chan (all of which still exist, BTW). Private individuals using social pressure, OTOH, is something I'm perfectly okay with. Platforming racists, conspiracy nuts, alt-right assholes, neo-Nazis, tankies (yes, I'm including them), and other vile people should not be socially acceptable, even if it's legally acceptable to do so, because the views of such people should not be socially acceptable. We're dealing with issues beyond simple disagreements over taxes or fiscal policy here. We're dealing with people who traffic in bigotry and dangerous conspiracy theories that threaten to undermine everything from public safety to democracy itself.

By pointing out that websites are platforming the worst sorts of people, it puts public pressure on companies to modify their practices. Bad PR like "This website is platforming people that are spreading COVID misinformation" can easily incentivize businesses to not associate with bad actors. Even if their motivations are purely financial rather than ideological (which is probably the case the vast majority of the time), companies are well within their rights to cease associating with whomever they want provided their reason for doing so doesn't run afoul of anti-discrimination laws. Adherence to a particular worldview does not constitute a protected group under civil rights laws and therefore viewpoint discrimination by private entities is allowed under U.S. law, and I'm not going to argue that it shouldn't be.

That being said, a lot more crap gets past the radar on mainstream social media than is ever banned. There's still a lot of really toxic right-wing garbage circulating on Twitter with nary a peep from the moderators. I mean, even Trump was allowed to say nearly everything he wanted for years, and it wasn't until after the January 6 insurrection that they banned him. They still let the worst sorts of humans spread their bile on the platform. They continue to let propagandist Christopher Rufo (think Frank Luntz but ten times worse) post even after he admitted to lying about what critical race theory is and conflating it with any discussion on race that's not copacetic with conservative ideology in order to make liberal views on race toxic in the public's mind. Yeah, he's the guy who helped weaponize "CRT" and made it the right's favorite buzzword to use in discussions on race. He's now moving on to admitting that he's trying to weaponize "groomer" in the same fashion, essentially encouraging right-wingers to insinuate that the opposition are pedophiles (already part of Q-Anon beliefs). That shit is dangerous beyond belief. It could get people killed (see also "stochastic terrorism"). Yet Twitter still lets the guy post like he's just some rando with perfectly harmless and rational opinions, and not someone who is literally lying in order to demonize anyone to the left of Trump.

A handful of high-profile people getting banned for shit that crossed the line because Twitter wanted to avoid a potential PR nightmare is hardly a "free speech" issue. If anything, Twitter is waaaaaay too soft, and their kid gloves will be even softer if Musk ends up owning it. And, need I remind everyone again, free speech provisions are generally understood as preventing the government from arresting you for saying things (though even then there are some necessary exceptions I shouldn't need to enumerate again), not as something preventing private entities from ceasing to associate with you because you said something beyond the pale. Getting banned from a website for breaking their content rules is no more a free speech issue than is a parent disciplining a child for using disrespectful language.

Also, I have absolutely no sympathy towards right-wingers who complain about cancel culture, not after they've tried and even succeeding in cancelling many people over the decades. Their hypocrisy causes their grievances to fall on deaf ears.

Last edited by Shadow1980 - on 25 April 2022


In accordance to the VGC forum rules, §8.5, I hereby exercise my right to demand to be left alone regarding the subject of the effects of the pandemic on video game sales (i.e., "COVID bump").