Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch was removed from Twitter yesterday for the post "Hydroclorquin is safe".... It is. It might not do shit for covid, but it's a well known safe drug we give away to nations with Malaria and anyone with Lupis.
I think one would be foolish to say that a lawyer who fought election changes and worked with Trump was actually banned for 'that'. It was just the excuse.
I find it funny that many people are onboard with social media companies banning speech that they dislike. This comes from both the left and right with numerous benign/extreme examples.
Meanwhile the same people supporting social media bans will scream about how traditional news (murdoch as a private example) promote speech that they don't like. Those people will also complain about the speech not allowed/censored from traditional news platforms.
So which is it? Are we talking about the rights of private companies? or are we genuinely talking about free speech? How can you have it one way for social media and another way for traditional news?
I don't think social media or traditional news monopolies should be dictating the voices we hear.
I think it's a little funny that any page getting shut off now is news. That doesn't preclude the fact that there's still lots of important things to talk about around platforms and social media and whether the bannings were good and justified, etc. Make no mistake about that.
However, just saying, it's a REALLY good time right now to make a bunch of noise if your page gets shut down...
10 comments
[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 33.7 ms ] threadDonald Trump was banned from Facebook and Twitter.
Law Enforcement Today from Facebook.
Ron Paul from Facebook.
Who am I missing?
I think one would be foolish to say that a lawyer who fought election changes and worked with Trump was actually banned for 'that'. It was just the excuse.
Meanwhile the same people supporting social media bans will scream about how traditional news (murdoch as a private example) promote speech that they don't like. Those people will also complain about the speech not allowed/censored from traditional news platforms.
So which is it? Are we talking about the rights of private companies? or are we genuinely talking about free speech? How can you have it one way for social media and another way for traditional news?
I don't think social media or traditional news monopolies should be dictating the voices we hear.
I agree and the amazing thing is the traditional centralized news (i.e. TV and radio) has been gatekeeping information for what? 100 years now?
However, just saying, it's a REALLY good time right now to make a bunch of noise if your page gets shut down...