It is a massive turn to the right for all Meta products; and underlines the futility of an omnibus platform.
What is needed is a plethora of platforms, just like we have multiple newspapers. Ultimately this will lead to an end of big tech (at least for social media).
This article seems to conflate Facebook allowing (or not allowing) you to say whatever you want and the government doing so.
The First Amendment gives Facebook the right to ban specifically Robby Soave's articles for no reason whatsoever.
Some people say that the government needs to force places like Facebook to host more user content in various ways. It'll be interesting to see how that pans out.
The only mention of the First Amendment seems to be specifically in regard to Zuck's allegation (whether you believe it or not) that the government subjected him to overwhelming pressure to fact check as he did.
I don't know whether that's legally a First Amendment violation, if true, but I don't think the article is conflating anything.
4 comments
[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 22.1 ms ] threadhttps://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...
What is needed is a plethora of platforms, just like we have multiple newspapers. Ultimately this will lead to an end of big tech (at least for social media).
The First Amendment gives Facebook the right to ban specifically Robby Soave's articles for no reason whatsoever.
Some people say that the government needs to force places like Facebook to host more user content in various ways. It'll be interesting to see how that pans out.
I don't know whether that's legally a First Amendment violation, if true, but I don't think the article is conflating anything.