- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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
Wonder why Twitter deleted this tweet?
Posted on 1/12/21 at 10:29 am
Posted on 1/12/21 at 10:29 am
7
Posted on 1/12/21 at 10:30 am to FlexDawg
Posted on 1/12/21 at 10:31 am to FlexDawg
Is that real?
Posted on 1/12/21 at 10:33 am to FlexDawg
I'm assuming based on this post that Twitter isn't your only avenue to post things on the internet
Posted on 1/12/21 at 10:33 am to FlexDawg
Did she really post that? Regardless, whoever wrote it seems to be right.
Posted on 1/12/21 at 10:33 am to FlexDawg
The Constitution? That old thing? Good luck finding a court willing to uphold it right now.
Posted on 1/12/21 at 10:34 am to navy
quote:
Is that real?
I just looked it up and yes, it's a real case that happened
Posted on 1/12/21 at 10:37 am to FlexDawg
In Marsh v Alabama it was a state deputy who did the arresting, i.e. the government. I get the comparisons being made to Twitter but without a state actor involved the comparisons won't hold water.
Posted on 1/12/21 at 10:37 am to navy
Posted on 1/12/21 at 10:37 am to sgallo3
quote:
I'm assuming based on this post that Twitter isn't your only avenue to post things on the internet
I'm sure the Jehovah's witness in Alabama had the US Mail, telephone, smoke signals at her disposal, too. But at some point real life should matter, and so this precedent is actually pretty interesting regarding Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc.
Posted on 1/12/21 at 10:39 am to navy
Link to the case (fixed)
This post was edited on 1/12/21 at 10:41 am
Posted on 1/12/21 at 10:40 am to AUin02
quote:
In Marsh v Alabama it was a state deputy who did the arresting, i.e. the government. I get the comparisons being made to Twitter but without a state actor involved the comparisons won't hold water.
It can set one precedent in terms of serving the public and subsequently stripping that same public of their 1st amendment rights after a LONG time of no warnings.
Posted on 1/12/21 at 10:42 am to FlexDawg
the only thing is this, Twitter isn't the only platform on the internet. which doesn't make it a monopoly, right?
Posted on 1/12/21 at 10:42 am to AUin02
quote:
In Marsh v Alabama it was a state deputy who did the arresting, i.e. the government. I get the comparisons being made to Twitter but without a state actor involved the comparisons won't hold water.
But did the SC ruling suggest that if it had been the company's private security that shut her down, that would be okay? I didn't read it that way.
Posted on 1/12/21 at 10:45 am to David_DJS
quote:
I'm sure the Jehovah's witness in Alabama had the US Mail, telephone, smoke signals at her disposal, too
but we're not talking about mail, telephone, smoke signals compared to a road, there are other websites you can literally use the exact same way as you use twitter, by typing a message on your keyboard and hitting submit
Posted on 1/12/21 at 10:54 am to sgallo3
quote:
but we're not talking about mail, telephone, smoke signals compared to a road, there are other websites you can literally use the exact same way as you use twitter, by typing a message on your keyboard and hitting submit
You're assuming you need to own 100% of a market to have a monopoly. That's not the case.
Posted on 1/12/21 at 10:57 am to finchmeister08
quote:
the only thing is this, Twitter isn't the only platform on the internet. which doesn't make it a monopoly, right?
Maybe not, but if you get collusion among all the media giants...that could be a potential problem.
Posted on 1/12/21 at 10:57 am to sgallo3
quote:
there are other websites you can literally use the exact same way as you use twitter,
Yes, and for the most part, they are all acting in the same free-speech limiting way. I think if Twitter were the ONLY social media to be blatantly censuring speech based on political opinion, no one would be crying, they'd just be using those other services. However, it isn't ONLY Twitter. It's essentially ALL of social media, and they've cut off (Parler), and/or threatened to cut off, those that do not do the same.
So yes, they have essentially blocked the road.
Posted on 1/12/21 at 10:59 am to finchmeister08
quote:
the only thing is this, Twitter isn't the only platform on the internet. which doesn't make it a monopoly, right?
However if you lump the coordinated efforts of Apple, google, Facebook, Twitter and amazon What avenues do you have left?
Posted on 1/12/21 at 11:07 am to ezride25
That was done when we had a Judicial branch that wasn't owned by a foreign power.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News