LogFAQs > #929966208

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, Database 5 ( 01.01.2019-12.31.2019 ), DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear
Topic List
Page List: 1
TopicWatching this guy's podcast and youtube took it down while it was going on.
Kungfu Kenobi
11/11/19 3:56:25 AM
#17:


darkknight109 posted...
You have no freedom of speech on a private platform.

For now.

I can see this changing, and yes, that would be constitutional.

As it is, you could never compel a platform to curate or not curate certain content. That's a constitutional non-starter. You can restrict their immunity to liability for content delivered through their service. Section 230 can be repealed or modified, and I see growing political will to do so. If we added a requirement that platforms must behave impartially to material that doesn't break the law in order to maintain their immunity from liability, we would see one of two things happen: freedom of expression would be the defacto standard on all internet platforms, or all platforms would become heavily curated "walled-gardens" with zero user content: which would be the end of all social media. I don't see the social media genie going back in the bottle.
---
This album is not available to the public.
Even if it were, you wouldn't wanna listen to it!
... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List
Page List: 1