This has nothing to do with 1A. Businesses have the right to refuse service if you're being too loud in their establishment. Sorry, not sorry.
There is also a big difference between one person's voice on a platform, and a decision-maker of the platform who is creating policy/process for filtering those voices.
I have yet to see any proof or evidence that 'elites' are engaged in such activities.
If you blame 'elites' with no further clarification for something, I'm going to assume you're pushing a dishonest agenda. If you were being honest, you'd identify your scary shadowy actors.
If the purpose of 1a is to foster a society where speech is democratic, then it does, because corporations have largely replaced governments as the primary arbiters of information. So philosophically, the idea behind it is very relevant.
The kind of power that governments abused, leading to 1a, is in some ways analogous to corporate power today. Whether that analogy is valid is the debate, right?
I'm not from the US, but I wonder - just like how liberalism radically reimagined governance and the role of the commons in their relationship to the state, I wonder how a revolution this century could radically reimagine the digital commons.
What will seem like obvious, basic digital rights, 100 years from now, that are completely unimaginable to my digitally medieval brain, like a preliberal medieval peasant?
Congress shall make no law...
no business serving the public can discriminate because of a customer's national origin, sex, religion, color, or race
Right, at the time of writing, that would have been perceived as the gravest threat to free expression. But I don't think that's still the case.
> Unless someone can prove people are being removed from platforms for reasons above companies are well within their rights to refuse service.
Agreed completely, I'm not making a legal claim. My claim attempts to stand on the moral philosophy behind these laws.
This sounds like people want to have the benefits of these platforms without accepting the trade offs.
Social media is the tip of the dystopic iceberg
They reflect common, primal human fears and are not indicative of insight. Just as my fear of heights does not provide wisdom against constructing/operating tall things - whether it be buildings, pyramids, or airplane flights.
The elites, like any other group, have a culture and a worldview shaped by it. They believe similar things, read similar news sources, have similar incentives and goals, etc.