you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Jesus 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Psyop article. Twitter is a private corporation as are ALL of these Social media companies. They have terms of services. They can ban whoever they want.

Stop fighting the corp. and hop on and create a new decentralized platform.

Calling for freespeech on their crap property is basically preaching communism. It's their crap property so create alternatives and don't LET THEM BUY YOU OFF.

[–]Zahn 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

I think this is a good idea to create balanced information. IF the platform has reached a certain size, ie...Facebook, Twitter etc. The problem is that with their overreaching bias, they are wrongfully influencing normies with their disinformation campaigns to affect national sentiment.

The precedent here is: back when railroad barons ruled the west, many towns popped up that were on the railroad corporations property. These barons weren't always very fair in their dealings with employees and the public. Inevitably the people that lived in these towns became very vocal about mistreatment. Whereupon, the corporation booted and banned them from their towns.

A court ruling on the case determined that once a town reached a certain size, even though it was owned by a corporation, was at that point considered public domain. And that constitutional rights, such as freedom of speech, could not be abrogated. The parallel here with Twitter is very similar.

[–]magnora7 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Well said. I agree with the idea of there being a certain size cutoff. Basically another form of anti-trust (anti-monopoly) laws.