I'm tired of this BS argument.
When you reach full monopoly on a market you have to be regulated.
FB has no right to dictate what can be said publicly. This is the role of governments.
When you reach full monopoly on a market you have to be regulated.
FB has no right to dictate what can be said publicly. This is the role of governments.
I don't mean to be a pedant, but its literally as old as time: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_Picture_Production_Code
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Randolph_Hearst
All TV stations have an editorial guide, this defines what can and can't be said. Sure you can push at the boundaries, but stray to far and you'll be pulled off air.
All newspapers have editorial standards as well.
This is why there was such an explosion in 'zine culture in the late 80s early 90s.
censorship by private individuals has always been there, we forget that in the last 10 years we've been able to literally say and do anything we want on the internet with little to no repercussions.
If you are finding it difficult to reach people, the onus is on you to find a way to reach an audience, not on them to provide it for you.
>When you reach full monopoly on a market you have to be regulated.
Facebook doesn't have anything like "full monopoly" on any market. They don't have a monopoly on the internet, they don't have a monopoly on social media. They don't have a monopoly on human communication. They're not even the most popular social media platform among some demographics.
>FB has no right to dictate what can be said publicly.
They're not dictating what can be said publicly, they're dictating what can be said on their platform which, yes, they have the right to do.