[flagged]
Meaning it’s hypocritical of conservatives to be offended by this. Liberals are less for unregulated free markets, so it isn’t hypocritical of liberals to be for regulation or whatever to prevent private companies from doing this or that.
It might be hypocrisy if the MP calls for a govt intervention (assuming he was some kind of free market advocate), but it was the poster here calling for breakup.
That is the problem.
I this case the idea od wishing a merry christmas? Where does that end you think?
1) If they seriously don't like it, they can change it (Gab, Paler, Truth Social).
2) When people do complain, they negotiate directly with the person they are complaining to instead of going via the government.
A non-free market would be much worse for the conservatives because the Silicon Valley standards would get enshrined in law and a competing platform would be taken out with lawsuits for allowing different opinions.
Look at Parler for example: They did not create a secure website, that is bad on them. Then activists stated targeting them and coordinated to get as much material off their site. The activists used Twitter to do this: https://media.cybernews.com/2021/01/crash-override2.jpg
Ostentatiously, this is against Twitter's TOS but no action has been taken as Twitter condones this activity against this social group and a competitor. https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/hacked-materi... https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/coordinated-h...
AWS then stopped providing service to Parler due to the content they were hosting exposed by this action. Well within their rights! But they excuse the same sort of content hosed by Twitter....
At some point people are looking at this and saying it is not a free market but a "Good Ole Boy's Club" and something needs to be done.
Personally, I think it was stupid for Twitter to ban people based on the message they send. But that is because I would like to be able to see what everyone is saying, not a small subset of people that uphold the "right" ideas.
The saying is that "Democracy dies in darkness"; We seem hellbent on throwing shade over every idea, opinion and inconvenient fact that comes along. We are bringing the night.
AWS cut off Parler after several months of moderation problems (https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/29095511/parler-llc-v-a...). They weren't motivated by Parler being hacked.
No they can't. Remember how all the major companies coordinated to shut down conservative sites they scapegoated for the Trump riot (which was actually organized mostly on Facebook)?
That was a dirty trick back at the time, but the free market seems to be working here. It isn't the "Nice Market" or the "Friends Market". It is a Free Market.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marsh_v._Alabama
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruneyard_Shopping_Center_v._R...
Neither of these cases are slam-dunks, but I'm a bit tired of people saying that the fact a website's private property necessarily means the owners have absolute control as if there were no possible objection to that stance.