”YouTube is acting as an arm of government and censoring their users for contradicting the government.” — Sen. Rand Paul
Said the man who’s part of that government. ;-)
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
”YouTube is acting as an arm of government and censoring their users for contradicting the government.” — Sen. Rand Paul
Said the man who’s part of that government. ;-)
Which makes the criticism more valid, not less. Even if Sen Paul weren't speaking in the sense of "contradicting [a branch of] the government", which he is, to criticize overreach is 100% consistent with his oversight role as a senator within government. So there'd be no contradiction.
Rand’s assertion that social media giants are doing the government’s bidding is facile. They don’t answer to the government, they answer to the bottom line. Why would a so-called libertarian have a problem with private companies doing what’s in their perceived best interests?
Doing its bidding? Probably not. At least probably not yet. Taking cues with an alarming amount of fealty to a left wing establishment to which many of its executives adhere. Definitely.
You don't need marching orders to toe the line.
Paul expressly acknowledged YouTube's legal right to make decisions that are bad for public discourse. This is one of their worst.
He's correct that they should face criticism for it.
If it were me I probably wouldn't have used the 'arm of government' angle. I'd emphasize the responsibility that should be expected of a company with YouTube's enormous market power.
The First Amendment is necessary to ensure free public discourse. It is not sufficient by itself. If freedom of speech disappears the effect on the life of the republic is the same whether by private whim or by public edict.