[PeekPoke]

Appalling interference in the election by yet another Tech giant. Why isn't this regulated?

[Mountain_Skies]

I don't see how this is interference but certainly could be considered an in-kind donation, which does carry with it certain regulatory obligations.

[avik1002]

So would it be fine if zuckerberg sent out mass message to vote for biden on facebook, instagram, or whatsapp right in your inbox? Blatant misuse of company data.

[dbbk]

Is this sarcasm or a genuine question? Endorsements aren't interference.

[Grustaf]

I don't agree with his alarmism and think it was stupid to send it, but why would it be regulated?

I think this is very different from Facebook or Twitter skew feeds in favour of some political cause.

First of all they are essentially public utilities, they shouldn't regulate speech as long as it's legal.

Secondly they do it without people's knowledge. David Barret's embarrassing email is completely honest and open.

[ahpearce]

Seems like a lot of people screaming about this sort of thing are the same people that support Citizens United. I don't see how they're much different. Free speech is free speech, whether or not you have access to an email list of 10m.

[rektide]

> First of all they are essentially public utilities, they shouldn't regulate speech as long as it's legal.

Hard no. There is no legal nor moral basis for this. Absolutely not.

[Grustaf]

There is no legal basis for them NOT to censor? What does that mean?

[rektide]

They are not utilities in any way. They are private entities.

They can control speech however they want in their realm. If they want to censor, it's completely in their right.

[UncleMeat]

Is it interference? Where are the free speech absolutists to defend this case?

[DerpyBaby123]

Tech giant? Ive never seen a reference to FAANGE

[biolurker1]

Total annihilation is possible for the first time ever if Trump remains. Seriously. That's why scientific American, NY times and many others for the first time in history took sides.

[polka_haunts_us]

You have a point, but you should really look for examples more interesting than a paper that has endorsed every D running for President since the 60s.

[HappySweeney]

"Interference" in this context is generally reserved for foreign actors. Isn't this CEO American? If so, how is this not a simple exercise of free political speech?

That being asked, while I agree with the message, I don't believe sending it was a good idea. It likely won't move the needle at all (most everyone has made up their mind), and potentially alienates Trump-supporting customers.