[disown]

Even more interesting is the blatant support of zuckerburg and facebook here.

Of all places, you'd think HN would support free speech, but yesterday, you got downvote brigaded for mentioning that facebook and tech companies shouldn't be our censors.

The logic was "we must protect democracy by having zuckerburg censor an elected government official".

One moment it's facebook is evil. The next moment, facebook and zuckerburg are the heroes we need to save democracy. Go figure.

[wizzwizz4]

Has it not occurred to you that, maybe, we should judge people for their actions? Rather than deciding upon an immutable set of Good People and Bad People, we should judge good and bad deeds?

[dionian]

If only Facebook would act that way towards Trump. He called for the people to leave the Capitol.

[w0de]

My friend, if you believe that tepid action redeems the inveterate liar and his despicable record of action, then there is little you won't look past.

[TheJazi13]

You can do the right thing every now and then while still being evil. It’s been obvious for a long time how stuffed with lies, hate and abuse the President’s social media account have been.

[dionian]

For example? Was it his tweets yesterday saying to comply with the police and leave the Capitol? can we be a bit more substantive?

[MacsHeadroom]

"The logic" for me is that private censorship IS free speech whether I agree with it personally or not.

The point of free speech protections are to protect the stuff you don't like. Don't like a private business censoring? That's free speech.

[Chris2048]

> The point of free speech protections are to protect the stuff you don't like

no, its to protect speech you don't like, not "stuff", or it could be abstracted to any number of maxims.

a private business cannot censor its own expressions, only those of others. The issue of censorship only cones up wrt publishing platforms discrimination on who they serve.