[12xo]

You do realize that the literal meaning and the legal meaning are two separate things, right?

Censorship in a privately owned entity is 100% legal. As is bias...

[_a40s]

rayiner answered you decisively and now you're just repeating part of his point.

[dx87]

I thought you said private entities can't censor? Now you're saying they can, but it's legal. So which is it?

[12xo]

They obviously can choose what content they choose to host and display. That is their right as long as it is not discriminatory or in violation of US law. While that is the literal definition of censorship, the issue is not about a free market is it? Nope. Is about the Right whining that their hate is not allowed to be amplified, hence they call it censorship. They, not me, are the ones stating that this is a free speech issue. I state it is not. Explicitly not.

Its a really simple concept. I am surprised you dont understand.

[rightbyte]

"Is about the Right whining that their hate is not allowed to be amplified, hence they call it censorship."

I kinda anticipated Twitter and FBs actions vs. "hate speak" would come down to this. The extremists were never the target they were just the excuse.