Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The court magically designates social media companies as “common carriers” in the decision. Uh, that’s on Congress to do so.
Social media companies are not monopolies and compete ferociously with each other for eyeballs and ad dollars. So that argument is out the window.
At the end of the day, conservatives want to force others to carry their lies and promote them under the guise of “free speech.” That’s what all this is about.
Uh, no, courts interpret laws, meaning they must have the ability to determine whether something is of a kind.
Also, common carrier doesn't mean monopoly.
Anonymous wrote:The court magically designates social media companies as “common carriers” in the decision. Uh, that’s on Congress to do so.
Social media companies are not monopolies and compete ferociously with each other for eyeballs and ad dollars. So that argument is out the window.
At the end of the day, conservatives want to force others to carry their lies and promote them under the guise of “free speech.” That’s what all this is about.
Anonymous wrote:So if social media companies can’t remove inappropriate content, I guess that means people are free to use social media platforms in Texas to post pro-trans propaganda, particularly that targeting teens and encouraging them to transition? And I guess they can use social media to promote books like Gender Queer without their content being removed?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So does this now mean that radio and TV stations must air whoever wants to buy an ad? School newspapers can't choose what to publish wrt ads? Ads for weed. KKK etc?
The problem is complex. Facebook and Twitter are more akin to phone companies than news media. You can’t regulate / censor speech on phone conversations. What this seemingly does is put (more?) accountability on the content creators. Trouble though may be that we can’t physically find the creators who may be abroad or an AI.
The are absolutely not akin to phone companies. Ask MySpace how it’s going for them.
But they aren’t like newspapers either.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So does this now mean that radio and TV stations must air whoever wants to buy an ad? School newspapers can't choose what to publish wrt ads? Ads for weed. KKK etc?
The problem is complex. Facebook and Twitter are more akin to phone companies than news media. You can’t regulate / censor speech on phone conversations. What this seemingly does is put (more?) accountability on the content creators. Trouble though may be that we can’t physically find the creators who may be abroad or an AI.
The are absolutely not akin to phone companies. Ask MySpace how it’s going for them.
But they aren’t like newspapers either.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So does this now mean that radio and TV stations must air whoever wants to buy an ad? School newspapers can't choose what to publish wrt ads? Ads for weed. KKK etc?
The problem is complex. Facebook and Twitter are more akin to phone companies than news media. You can’t regulate / censor speech on phone conversations. What this seemingly does is put (more?) accountability on the content creators. Trouble though may be that we can’t physically find the creators who may be abroad or an AI.
The are absolutely not akin to phone companies. Ask MySpace how it’s going for them.
But they aren’t like newspapers either.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So does this now mean that radio and TV stations must air whoever wants to buy an ad? School newspapers can't choose what to publish wrt ads? Ads for weed. KKK etc?
The problem is complex. Facebook and Twitter are more akin to phone companies than news media. You can’t regulate / censor speech on phone conversations. What this seemingly does is put (more?) accountability on the content creators. Trouble though may be that we can’t physically find the creators who may be abroad or an AI.
The are absolutely not akin to phone companies. Ask MySpace how it’s going for them.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So does this now mean that radio and TV stations must air whoever wants to buy an ad? School newspapers can't choose what to publish wrt ads? Ads for weed. KKK etc?
The problem is complex. Facebook and Twitter are more akin to phone companies than news media. You can’t regulate / censor speech on phone conversations. What this seemingly does is put (more?) accountability on the content creators. Trouble though may be that we can’t physically find the creators who may be abroad or an AI.
Except for the whole local of local/regional monopolies thing.
Anonymous wrote:So if social media companies can’t remove inappropriate content, I guess that means people are free to use social media platforms in Texas to post pro-trans propaganda, particularly that targeting teens and encouraging them to transition? And I guess they can use social media to promote books like Gender Queer without their content being removed?