Elon musk buying Twitter how far are you willing to go for free speech? Should all all places be free speech ? Are the the forums you know of free speech???
Elon musk buying Twitter how far are you willing to go for free speech? Should all all places be free speech ? Are the the forums you know of free speech???
Big tech has formed a monopoly to stifle speech they consider contradictory to their goals, they have been given legal protection which enables them to do this. The "public square" now exist online and we must reconcile with how that is going to exist while protecting 1st amendment rights.
Elon musk buying Twitter how far are you willing to go for free speech? Should all all places be free speech ? Are the the forums you know of free speech???
Big tech has formed a monopoly to stifle speech they consider contradictory to their goals, they have been given legal protection which enables them to do this. The "public square" now exist online and we must reconcile with how that is going to exist while protecting 1st amendment rights.
What Monopoly? There’s Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Reddit, TikTock, Pinterest, Snapchat, LinkedIn, Parlar, Gettr, and Truth social just off the top of my head. That doesn’t sounds like a monopoly to me.
I guess it all depends on how you feel about the "publisher vs platform" argument.
We don't have the freedom to say what we want on this site. Our speech is regulated per the site rules. If you don't agree you are free to go elsewhere.
But if you claim to be a platform that is open to the free exchange of thoughts and ideas but you really aren't... Then you're just garbage. I see no legal means of recourse. But it's definitely a bad look.
I don't trust Elon Musk more than any other rich and powerful person. But I do hope he buys Twitter and shakes it up and changes it from being a leftist echo chamber. Free speech should potentially be a cause of discomfort for everyone.
We've heard over and over, "It's a free market. If you don't like it, start your own platform." Musk took it a step further and said, "How about I buy this one and run it the way I want?"
And all of a sudden leftist crybabies don't like the free market anymore.
Elon musk buying Twitter how far are you willing to go for free speech? Should all all places be free speech ? Are the the forums you know of free speech???
I belong to a hunting forum. No swearing or disrespect is allowed, but any topic is open.
What Monopoly? There’s Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Reddit, TikTock, Pinterest, Snapchat, LinkedIn, Parlar, Gettr, and Truth social just off the top of my head. That doesn’t sounds like a monopoly to me.
The way in which they work together to suppress dissident voices is what makes them a Monopoly. The people banned on Twitter are also banned on most of the rest of the list, that is not an accident. Combine that with Google, Apple, etc promoting or demoting apps/websites that do not meet there desired political leanings and we have a problem.
How do we define "The public square"? The Supreme court took a bit of a stab at it in the 2017 decision Packingham V North Carolina but there needs to be further clarity as to how widely the "public square" will apply to the Web.
Elon musk buying Twitter how far are you willing to go for free speech? Should all all places be free speech ? Are the the forums you know of free speech???
Originally Posted by WANNABE-TRAPPER
It’s a private biz they can do what they want. Just like Trapperman. First amendment only covers government actions.
It's a publicly traded private business, which answers to it's shareholders. That said, yes, they can run it as they see fit. And if someone with a lot of money doesn't like the way they run it, they can attempt to take it over and run it the way THEY see fit. Ah... capitalism is great.
Red mt, I don't think I understand what you're getting at here? It would make sense if the government was trying to tell a private business what speech they could or could not limit. If that were the case, as much as I despise Twitter, I would support them against the government. But this is nothing like that. This is one businessman telling some other businessmen... hey, I think I can run your company better than you... so I'm going to try to get it and do just that. What's wrong with that?
In my belief any topic is fair game,,,, no swearing no racist comments,,, or crude jokes. Should be normal for censorship.but a voice heard in the wilderness should be heard. Imo
While I wholeheartedly support the concept of a business such as Twitter having right to control content on their site much like Boss Dobbins does here there's a fly in the ointment.
At what point do large all encompassing and quite frankly monopolistic enterprises such as Google, Facebook/Meta and Twitter go beyond simple policing of harmful speech and start to steer the narrative of public discourse and common knowledge?
JMO, but they have gone way beyond that point and the dream of a free and open internet is now a farce of monopolistic power.
the sitting potus was cancelled and not allowed to post on social media and some of you folks still think we have free speech......time to wake up. The liberals control the very largest majority of the narrative given to the citizens of the USA.....pasaki & biden lie day after day, spin away every day and no one really challenges that but Trump was fought with tooth and nail every day of his presidency by the same media outlets. If you cannot see that disparity your blind and if you do see it and still think we have free speech your mistaken. Conservatives that speak their minds are cancelled if what they say does not match the official version and musk will never be allowed to control a part of their propaganda branch.
the sitting potus was cancelled and not allowed to post on social media and some of you folks still think we have free speech......time to wake up. The liberals control the very largest majority of the narrative given to the citizens of the USA.....pasaki & biden lie day after day, spin away every day and no one really challenges that but Trump was fought with tooth and nail every day of his presidency by the same media outlets. If you cannot see that disparity your blind and if you do see it and still think we have free speech your mistaken. Conservatives that speak their minds are cancelled if what they say does not match the official version and musk will never be allowed to control a part of their propaganda branch.
the sitting potus was cancelled and not allowed to post on social media and some of you folks still think we have free speech......time to wake up. The liberals control the very largest majority of the narrative given to the citizens of the USA.....pasaki & biden lie day after day, spin away every day and no one really challenges that but Trump was fought with tooth and nail every day of his presidency by the same media outlets. If you cannot see that disparity your blind and if you do see it and still think we have free speech your mistaken. Conservatives that speak their minds are cancelled if what they say does not match the official version and musk will never be allowed to control a part of their propaganda branch.
There is a difference in free speech there is the liberal 's free speech and the rest. Being part of the rest the truth is thuth. No matter what areana you are in do not let then cancel you.
If they can cancel the sitting potus, have the head of the joint chiefs conspire against the sitting potus and with the liberals and china and he is still there in that same position..... they can cancel anyone....we are seeing them try to cancel a whole country (russia) right now.
It’s a private biz they can do what they want. Just like Trapperman. First amendment only covers government actions.
BS it covers government actions,,,, it covers our speech so they do not arrest you. Like second amendment it's not for your hunting gun perse it's to guard against the government doing something stupid.the government work for us not the other way around.
I think Dr. Jordon Peterson offered a golden nugget on this topic when he addressed the danger of the Virtual Signaling Cancel Culture. & why free speech is best served in knowing that it must be offered knowing that the listeners can be offended but risking the discomfort of such offense is a necessity for any thinking people. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMAe9xjoqwc
One should be able to speak the truth. When the truth starts effecting the bottom dollar is when people get shut down fast. A lot of people don't like the truth.
With out boundrys and sauvernty there is no free speech. Look at Babylon in the Bible. Just like our world today, the world is at you're fingertips. Look at the differences in say the trapping regs from state to state. So would we be better of to have state relations or have things being run on a federal level. Will we ever have free speech on a private platform. Just try and speak your mind in a crowd of people you don't know, there's a good chance some one would try to silence you if they could. Maybe I'm just on a rant but I can't see un sencered speech on a private platform, its not human nature. Definitely not one as big as tweeter.
You guys need read Wikipedia on the on first amendment. It read the the government can't make laws against religion, free speech I That is looks like to me????
You guys need read Wikipedia on the on first amendment. It read the the government can't make laws against religion, free speech I That is looks like to me????
Still confused. At first I thought I didn't agree with you but your subsequent posts made me think that I did agree with you. But I can't feature what the government has to do with Twitter and Elon Musk? Unless you're possibly referring to some of the laws pertaining to the stock market?
woman/mother goes to school board meeting to talk and protest policies......fbi then gets involved...all she did was speak and never threatened anyone. If you think the government does not use its power to intimidate speech it does not care for your wrong.
woman/mother goes to school board meeting to talk and protest policies......fbi then gets involved...all she did was speak and never threatened anyone. If you think the government does not use its power to intimidate speech it does not care for your wrong.
The Government can lable any one a terrorist. They call it liberty.
You guys need read Wikipedia on the on first amendment. It read the the government can't make laws against religion, free speech I That is looks like to me????
Still confused. At first I thought I didn't agree with you but your subsequent posts made me think that I did agree with you. But I can't feature what the government has to do with Twitter and Elon Musk? Unless you're possibly referring to some of the laws pertaining to the stock market?
I do not know much about stock market laws if any. But it seems on a couple news sites that there were claims that government was not favor of this buy out ,,,,,twitter sad no to the offer.,,,, I do not know if over yet but I hope Elon musk gets it myself.
Incredible to me is how in my lifetime people have become so afraid of words. I can listen, read, agree, disagree, walk away or stand to debate. Any of these options simply require my god given common sense. What a spineless lazy generation has been created.
As for Elon we know what we have, I don’t fear what we may get.
Hard to argue against free speech. We should be able to express our opinions.
Not sure that free speech should guarantee someone the right to purposefully spread lies about another, or to claim a medical science that is knowing false or unproven.
Every night during the evening news a company claims their OTC product improves memory. Not sure I trust all OTC drug claims as true.
As for the comments above, I'm seeing a lot of socialists on this forum when issues of capitalism arise. What's worse is I'm seeing more and more authoritarian views when issues of freedom arise.
Twitter is exactly like Tman. Anyone can join. Just follow the rules of the private business. Nancy Pelosi (I suggest a different handle) could join Tman if she agrees to the rules. Same with Twitter. If Paul doesn't want her, he can deny an account. I would.
I will agree Twitter, Facebook, et al. do not appear to enforce the rules equally. The remedy? Leave the site.
Hard to argue against free speech. We should be able to express our opinions.
Not sure that free speech should guarantee someone the right to purposefully spread lies about another, or to claim a medical science that is knowing false or unproven.
Every night during the evening news a company claims their OTC product improves memory. Not sure I trust all OTC drug claims as true.
Everyone knows that most in the media have an agenda. Right and left. What do you propose Marty? A dictator of your choosing with a state controlled press?
No such thing as free speech. Say the wrong thing to someone you will find out the cost.
There is also a cost in not speaking & Virtual Signaling Cancel Culture is all about getting on a High Horse and destroying folks even if they are telling the truth. Thus balance can only be found in the exchange of free speech. Deplatforming is way too popular among the pretend truth elites versus the irony of hypocrisy in silencing others. A debate that I take heart from in protecting free speech & allowing me to weigh my own ability to find my truth. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkSBfdXNWWk&t=171s
EXCLUSIVE — Outgoing White House press secretary Jen Psaki's use of her official position to disparage the competitor of her prospective future employer warrants an investigation by the Office of Government Ethics and the Department of Justice, a watchdog group said Tuesday.
Psaki publicly disparaged MSNBC competitor Fox News during an appearance Thursday on the left-wing podcast Pod Save America, saying the cable news network "might make anyone sound like a stupid son of a b****" in reference to White House reporter Peter Doocy. The outgoing press secretary said the following day on Twitter she was not being critical of Doocy or any reporter at Fox News, but the watchdog group Protect the Public's Trust said the damage is already done.
Despite her statements to the contrary, she appears to be willing to simply plow through without any regard to these additional obligations," Chamberlain said. "Her latest — the demeaning of Fox News, a competitor of her prospective employer, while seeming to act in her official capacity — appears to be a misuse of her official position. Under the circumstances, it’s hard to see how the American public would not perceive the appearance of a conflict of interest."
I don’t think free speech is a issue until someone is denied it. Antitrust issued are possible but as some near the top has already noted,Mathis field is clogged with public platforms..
Hate mail is not a form of free speech, and can be suppressed if it violates a platform’s rules. Same for false threats, even if meant as a joke. Ask Qanon if in doubt. They have a track record of threatening, unfounded, statements about cannibalism.
Most people only champion free speech when the speaker says what they want to hear.
I dont twitter or facebook. I dont really care who owns either one. Never hear anything good about them no matter who is talking.
Free press IS a big deal. I will load my rifle to protect it.
Since outlets have the freedom to broadcast their own perspective you ARE going to hear stuff that raises your blood pressure. That happens with freedom.
Boco, the reaction to free speech your describing comes from being rude on the part of the speaker. Rudeness and free speech are not synonyms.
Good friend of mine keeps telling me that media telling a lie should be prosecutable. I do not agree. Who ever gets to decide what the truth is will have to much authority over free people. Almost daily you hear people here on TMan saying which news outlet they prefer. Media is primarily a business. That keeps lies down to a dull roar. Expressing opinion and acting like its reporting is most definitely protected speech and it should be. Again, I will load my rifle to protect that.
Free speech and free press keeps us strong. Twitter and face book do NOT have to be participated in. I do neither and dont feel I am missing a thing. If you dont like their narrative why do you sign up??????????????????????????????????????
Hard to argue against free speech. We should be able to express our opinions.
Not sure that free speech should guarantee someone the right to purposefully spread lies about another, or to claim a medical science that is knowing false or unproven.
Every night during the evening news a company claims their OTC product improves memory. Not sure I trust all OTC drug claims as true.
Why?
Folks seem to forget "Free Speech," is sister to another & just as important rule of Law. That rule of law if you use lies or slander to control speech you can & should be charged. This is where "Free Speech," when done for truth is failing because Government is busy diverting the attention to the lies & allowing the lies to increase the violence & riots we see today. The press & Media should face the courts more often for misleading the public through slander for political gain & then cover from politicians who benefit from division.
Slander today is a civil matter. Needs to stay that way. The person being slandered suing the person or entity that slandered them. The person or entity being sued given the option of a bench trial or a jury.
Mira who gets to decide what is slander and lies? The same government spreading slander and lies?
Ask the Sandman or Rittenhouse where slander laws in Court can defeat Government & Media misleads, Danny. Slander laws & Free speech must be sister laws to each other & it is up to the voters to make sure of those important distinctions.
What makes you think that it's about controlling free speech? Perhaps its about taking current controls off of speech?[/quote]
Exactly I also feel that free speech is a two-edged sword & it is up to us to figure out that being gullible or misinformed is diametrically opposed to not being correctly informed at all. Lately, the difference has been that the public was not given the truth about some pretty nefarious political games which have detrimentally affected the whole of North America.
I guess it all depends on how you feel about the "publisher vs platform" argument.
We don't have the freedom to say what we want on this site. Our speech is regulated per the site rules. If you don't agree you are free to go elsewhere.
But if you claim to be a platform that is open to the free exchange of thoughts and ideas but you really aren't... Then you're just garbage. I see no legal means of recourse. But it's definitely a bad look.
I don't trust Elon Musk more than any other rich and powerful person. But I do hope he buys Twitter and shakes it up and changes it from being a leftist echo chamber. Free speech should potentially be a cause of discomfort for everyone.
We've heard over and over, "It's a free market. If you don't like it, start your own platform." Musk took it a step further and said, "How about I buy this one and run it the way I want?"
And all of a sudden leftist crybabies don't like the free market anymore.