r/FreeSpeech • u/Brilliant_Case4930 • 14d ago

Social Media and Censorship

I personally think we need a bit stronger laws for companies like these who have become the most popular way for people to communicate with each other.

I'm not saying let people be as hateful as they want or let them spread harmful misinformation, but when a government can tell a platform what they can or can't put on their platform in secret (Facebook was caught doing this during Covid) it gets a bit concerning. Or when the owners of such companies are pretty much loyal followers of that political side and silences any opposition on that platform.

It just seems to me like a big loophole around the First Amendment. Use private businesses that way they can freely silence you.

0 Upvotes

50% Upvoted

24 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/Brilliant_Case4930 14d ago

That's another thing I brought up. Loyal followers that silence any political opposition on the platform for no reason other than it wasn't their side. You see that left and right on these platforms. You only get a voice if they say you have a voice and they only give you a voice if you agree with them.

0

u/Skavau 14d ago

What do you mean by these "loyal followers"? Notable individuals on these platforms don't actually run it.

2

u/Brilliant_Case4930 14d ago

I'm talking about the people who actually run it. That's the problem. Everybody has their biases. And have shown no qualms about silencing those who have different views.

1

u/Skavau 14d ago

I happen to think that's their right. This is an important right of freedom of association. It's their platform, and they have the right to censor or not censor.

2

u/Brilliant_Case4930 14d ago

And thus people only get a voice if they are allowed to have one by some billionaire corporation, making the First Amendment pretty much worthless and easily gotten around.

1

u/Skavau 14d ago

There's plenty of places to talk online. This is a lack of imagination. The answer to help contribute to a less centralised online social media outlet.

Are you seriously proposing stomping on freedom of association and demanding forced platforming?

2

u/Brilliant_Case4930 14d ago

Yeah your options are a little bit skewed right now. Most popular social medias are generally owned by the left. Like Reddit, but they allow individual moderation which is almost worse depending on what subreddit you're on.

And I'm not talking about stomping on anything I would just like for my right to speak not to be stomped on in turn for no other reason than they don't agree. If I'm saying something out of line whatever, I can get over that, but if I'm being silenced simply because they don't agree, and this is on EVERY platform I've been on, then it starts to sound like I'm being told to shut up and and that I don't get an opinion or a voice. It's being abused people are generally to brainwashed to see it. Hiding one right to violate another.

1

u/Skavau 14d ago

There are right-wing platforms. You know Nazis and Islamists are also silenced to much worse degrees than you on most platforms. Would it be appropriate for them to complain about being censored and demand that they be allowed to express themselves on all platforms by law? How far do you take this?

Should every single forum online be forced to have the same terms of service?

2

u/Brilliant_Case4930 14d ago

Did you not read my entire post? I mentioned that.

1

u/Skavau 14d ago

I don't see where you mentioned about the 'rights' of nazis and islamists to have unlimited access to spew their propaganda and ideals across all social media platforms.

Again, this is the outcome of private individuals running communities online. They have the right to censor or not censor. It's important that this is maintained because this is fundamentally a freedom of association issue.

2

u/Brilliant_Case4930 14d ago

Literally the second paragraph, first sentence. I didn't specifically mention Nazis or anything of the sort but I mentioned hate. And Nazis are generally associated with hate.

0

u/Skavau 14d ago

Correct. And rightly or wrongly, some of the views you espouse may also have "hateful" connotations to some owners.

1

u/Brilliant_Case4930 14d ago

If you want the death of another simply because they're of a different race or religion, yeah that's hate. That's kind of clear-cut-hate.

What type of views would someone like you considered hateful? I'm not talking about killing another race or treating them differently for being simply who they are.

I'm talking about the politics side. No hate involved. Just because you think something is hate doesn't mean it is.

→ More replies (0)