re: Poll: should Facebook, Twitter, etc be allowed to ban people for political speech?

quote:

---

So what? Please just answer a simple question.. Should Facebook have to keep every bit of garbage posted on to their platform up, and if so, why? The mass murderer in NZ posted a video of his carnage there, should it have to stay up? Draw the line for everybody

---

Look Commie

Use common sense.

There’s something called the constitution and it’s the best thing there is to reference in regards to speech.

First of all social media bans and cites “hate speech”. Now sometimes it is actually hate speech and sometimes it’s not. Real hate speech is using racial slurs, religious bigotry, etc. “Hate speech” is being conservative and disagreeing with liberals.

So since social media obviously has an issue with differentiating hate speech and opposing opinions they should use the constitution as a reference.

In the constitution hate speech is allowed. You can call someone whatever you want, be a dick, be a bigot, be racist, etc. Legally you are permitted to do all of that.

If you don’t like something on social media guess what? Block the page or the person. It’s that simple. That ability should be available on all platforms.

Here is what isn’t protected under the 1st amendment:
Fighting words
Defamation (including libel and slander)
Child pornography
Perjury
Blackmail
Incitement to imminent lawless action
True threats
Solicitations to commit crimes

Social media should permit all speech with the exception of the above. Don’t like what you see? Block it or keep scrolling.

To summarize:
All speech should be allowed except for that which is not protected under the 1st amendment. If you don’t like something or someone hit the block button.

That's a beautiful, long paragraph of jibberish that only proves you have no idea the difference between what the government can't censor and what private entities inherently can

Try again

quote:

---

That's a beautiful, long paragraph of jibberish that only proves you have no idea the difference between what the government can't censor and what private entities inherently can Try again

---

You said draw the line so I drew the line.

Do you want to talk about “muh private company”

“The private company” Facebook that owns Instagram and WhatsApp and along with Google controls 80% of social media revenue. The “private companies” Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, who collude together to silence conservatives and meddle in our elections.

Or

Are we going to talk about

quote:

---

Should Facebook have to keep every bit of garbage posted on to their platform up, and if so, why? The mass murderer in NZ posted a video of his carnage there, should it have to stay up? Draw the line for everybody

---

You asked for an opinion here:

quote:

---

Should Facebook have to keep every bit of garbage posted on to their platform up, and if so, why? The mass murderer in NZ posted a video of his carnage there, should it have to stay up? Draw the line for everybody

---

Now it looks like you want to change the subject to “muh private company”. I get it.

Your precious “private businesses” are meddling in our elections. Silencing one political party while allowing the other free roam. Besides social media giants colluding with one another, you don’t think they are in bed with liberal activist groups, government politicians, and billionaire oligarchs?

Facebook and Google control 80% of social media revenue. Sure someone can create a platform but the social media giants and Google will collude to prevent them from becoming mainstream. Google banned Gab from its App Store for “hate speech”. So there is no competition and no competition will be allowed.

Our very own media has taken on the communist China model and you seem to be in favor of social media going the same direction.

quote:

---

Now it looks like you want to change the subject to “muh private company”. I get it.

---

Wow, you're coming around!

Stay gold, Pony Boy