'Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote on behalf of the majority that, while the First Amendment's free speech clause applies to "state actors" or governmental entities, the network is a private entity, not a state actor: "Providing some kind of forum for speech is not an activity that only governmental entities have traditionally performed," the decision reads. "Therefore, a private entity who provides a forum for speech is not transformed by that fact alone into a state actor."'
Of course a private business is not a state actor. I feel we're speaking different languages. It's illegal for a business to discriminate against people for their political views, unless those views are making direct physical threats of harm to others. When a social media platform starts to discriminate against users who they disagree with, that is illegal. They have a right to prevent ALL political content on their site, but have no right to offer service to some, while discriminating against others based on race, religion, political view, gender, sexual preference, etc.
When social media users violate their listed rules, that is not politics.
Because more people on the right, many who cloak hate in their 'politics', have been banned does not make it a political action by fb.
It is nice to try to frame it that way, if it suits you, but the reality is when someone builds ANYTHING and owns it, they have a right to ask me to follow the rules or leave.
I'm not sure you're reading my posts. I can literally point you to COUNTLESS hateful posts by the left, far more than anything on the right....it's not even close. These posts on the left don't get flagged by these social media platforms automatically. They ALWAYS have to be brought to their attention publicly before they act. The mysterious algorithm they always blame only seems to target one political side, over and over again.
What I said was, there are NO clear rules. They make their rules completely subjective so they can discriminate against conservative views.
We're literally seeing fascist groups like antifa pretend they're anti-fascist while spewing the most hate filled rhetoric about destroying anyone who even asks a question they disagree with. That's literally fascism and these sites ignore most of it.
You have Al Sharpton, one of the most racist people on the planet...right up there with the KKK, who still has not been banned. I could list about 3 dozen more off the top of my head.
It's illegal to discriminate against anyone for race, political view point, gender or sexual orientation. Have rules is fine. But you can't have 1 set of rules for one group, and not enforce them for another.
I can't open a restaurant and say I'm only going to only serve white people...then try to claim it's ok because I'm a private business.
I can have rules for behavior, but those rules can't be applied differently based on my political views, race, etc. I feel like I'm repeating myself, but apparently you're just not understanding.
Exactly...they're considered a platform.
'Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote on behalf of the majority that, while the First Amendment's free speech clause applies to "state actors" or governmental entities, the network is a private entity, not a state actor: "Providing some kind of forum for speech is not an activity that only governmental entities have traditionally performed," the decision reads. "Therefore, a private entity who provides a forum for speech is not transformed by that fact alone into a state actor."'
https://psmag.com/news/a-supreme-courts-decision-could-have-implications-for-social-media-free-speech
Of course a private business is not a state actor. I feel we're speaking different languages. It's illegal for a business to discriminate against people for their political views, unless those views are making direct physical threats of harm to others. When a social media platform starts to discriminate against users who they disagree with, that is illegal. They have a right to prevent ALL political content on their site, but have no right to offer service to some, while discriminating against others based on race, religion, political view, gender, sexual preference, etc.
When social media users violate their listed rules, that is not politics.
Because more people on the right, many who cloak hate in their 'politics', have been banned does not make it a political action by fb.
It is nice to try to frame it that way, if it suits you, but the reality is when someone builds ANYTHING and owns it, they have a right to ask me to follow the rules or leave.
I'm not sure you're reading my posts. I can literally point you to COUNTLESS hateful posts by the left, far more than anything on the right....it's not even close. These posts on the left don't get flagged by these social media platforms automatically. They ALWAYS have to be brought to their attention publicly before they act. The mysterious algorithm they always blame only seems to target one political side, over and over again.
What I said was, there are NO clear rules. They make their rules completely subjective so they can discriminate against conservative views.
We're literally seeing fascist groups like antifa pretend they're anti-fascist while spewing the most hate filled rhetoric about destroying anyone who even asks a question they disagree with. That's literally fascism and these sites ignore most of it.
You have Al Sharpton, one of the most racist people on the planet...right up there with the KKK, who still has not been banned. I could list about 3 dozen more off the top of my head.
It's illegal to discriminate against anyone for race, political view point, gender or sexual orientation. Have rules is fine. But you can't have 1 set of rules for one group, and not enforce them for another.
I can't open a restaurant and say I'm only going to only serve white people...then try to claim it's ok because I'm a private business.
I can have rules for behavior, but those rules can't be applied differently based on my political views, race, etc. I feel like I'm repeating myself, but apparently you're just not understanding.