[BFatts]

Censorship, by a company? On their own platform? How is that possible? As far as I know, only government cannot abridge your right to speech. A platform, like a store, has the right to remove those that use their platform to promote speech counter to the owner of the platform.

[stcredzero]

Time to burn some karma to debunk some popular incorrect understandings.

Censorship, by a company? On their own platform? How is that possible?

It happens all the time.

As far as I know, only government cannot abridge your right to speech.

False. Marsh v. Alabama. A company owning a company town, owning the roads and sidewalks, can't use the power of their property rights to abridge your right of speech. Read the ruling and do the math: A private company absolutely can abridge someone's free speech!

It's mainly the case that US laws cover the circumstance of the government abridging your speech. However, it's common sense that powerful entities, like mega-corporations, can also squelch a person's speech. Sometimes this is also illegal, though not always. This is clear in US case law.

You've been lied to about this, basically, by people with an ideological axe to grind. (Probably unintentionally through wishful thinking.)

A platform, like a store, has the right to remove those that use their platform to promote speech counter to the owner of the platform.

If the platform is doing that straight-up, explicitly, then sure, they can do that. They can put political affiliation right in their Terms of Service. However, if they are accomplishing this as a bait and switch, saying they're doing one thing, then doing another, then that's clearly not right.

If people are engaged in interstate commerce while colluding between companies to do this, then maybe this should fall under RICO. I hope so, anyhow.

[igetspam]

So then these media platforms are in collusion AND own the internet? I'm not one to throw foil ball hats around because I have plenty of my own but your security systems must be awesome.

[stcredzero]

So then these media platforms are in collusion

They've been doing quite the dance to keep out of discovery.

AND own the internet?

Facebook et al control a lot of internet traffic through their users. Many of their users still treat their platform like it is the internet.

[gremlinsinc]

Facebook is a website, if I don't go there they have no power.

America Online had communities, chat, email etc... if I didn't use their software, I couldn't dial into the internet. That's a BIG difference.

[gremlinsinc]

So, in the 1980s...any dick or joe could walk off the street and demand air time on NBC nightly news?

Because, the platforms given to people today expand the voice/reach of everyday citizens unlike anything in history, but with great power comes great responsibility.

I can tweet something that could become a "meme" or reach a lot of people as an everyday citizen, it's more rare for a non-blue-checkmark account, but it's possible. I've had reddit posts with > 2k upvotes...

Show me how any of this platform/reach was accessible in the 1980's, this is progress and it's also grey murky waters. People should absolutely NOT be allowed to share stuff that is just propaganda and without facts/statistics.

I saw a funny meme the other day that said basically: Stop trying to use stats and facts to argue with "liberals", those don't work anymore they're all doctored by the left... or maybe just maybe -- there aren't facts and stats that support a world-view that's so out of touch with reality the numbers can't even be slightly fubared to appear reasonable.