- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Federal Court rules Big Tech has no 'freewheeling First Amendment right to censor'.
Posted on 9/19/22 at 3:54 pm to 1BIGTigerFan
Posted on 9/19/22 at 3:54 pm to 1BIGTigerFan
Good. These companies communicate publicly and benefit from the public provide infrastructure to do so, and have govt protections as long as they don't meddle in what is actually said or shared. With in decency rules. Though our society has thrown away all sorts of decorum the last decade. Dropping GD all you want but don't hurt the feelings of other protected groups.
They started meddling, so they need to learn they no longer can.
They started meddling, so they need to learn they no longer can.
0
Posted on 9/19/22 at 4:04 pm to deltaland
Corporations are people my friend
Posted on 9/19/22 at 4:09 pm to 1BIGTigerFan
quote:the problem is one man's spam is another's free speech. If private companies want to limit speech, i think that's their right. But they should at least be transparent about it and any links to government should be severed and any government official using their office to steer these decisions should be removed from that office and face at least civil penalties
The ruling says corporations can't censor a person's opinion. It doesn't say it can't ban someone for spamming the board.
Posted on 9/19/22 at 4:39 pm to TSLG
quote:
If you were cursing excessively, TD mods would ban you for cursing.
What the frick are you talking about? (In case you're wondering.... I didn't say "frick")
This post was edited on 9/19/22 at 4:40 pm
Posted on 9/19/22 at 4:45 pm to UFMatt
quote:
The issue is not just about censorship, it is about discrimination against conservative views. If they were consistent in their censorship, and carry that across all political views, it would be different.
They are collaborating with the IC in a conspiracy against the Republic.
Posted on 9/19/22 at 4:46 pm to 1BIGTigerFan
I mean, if PACS and politicians can spam my texts and spam calling me - then citizens can talk freely on social media too.
Posted on 9/19/22 at 6:15 pm to 1BIGTigerFan
quote:
It's linked in the article.
No, in fact it is not linked in the article.
Posted on 9/19/22 at 8:27 pm to Tigers0918
quote:
since when do people have freedom of speech wherever they want? You can't go into a business and say whatever you want without being thrown out. A private business should be able to regulate what they want.
No one said otherwise. Most platforms have rules or Terms of Service of some type. It’s not censorship to enforce those.
What has the potential to get these companies into trouble is applying those rules unevenly with no attempt to course correct. What can get them into very deep trouble is enabling or allowing government agencies to in any way facilitate that uneven application of the rules merely because a user expresses a dissenting opinion.
That’s simply beyond the scope of anything a “private business” (especially one that labels itself a platform under Section 230) is entitled to do, legally speaking.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News