[throw_m239339]

Twitter literally censored presidents and ex-presidents. We're already way down the slope. Twitter can't act like they are victim of government pressure when they act like an extension of a certain political party in power and literally does their bidding...

[GiorgioG]

Can we stop pretending that the right didn't do this to themselves? It's fine for politicians and elected officials to have their own opinions, it's not OK for them to misrepresent them as outright facts. That's literally the definition of "fake news" which they love to tout anytime someone says something uncomfortable about them. As these politicians continue to live in an alternate reality, they bring with them an inordinate number of voters. As we go from stretching the truth to lying, the lies become more extreme, as do the political views. We are no longer Americans with different views, we are opponents unable to have a discussion about the issues. And of course now the left is also free to use similar tactics going forward. It's a slippery slope. Both parties must be held accountable for their b.s.

I'm an unaffiliated/independent voter and I've voted for both parties in the past (with varying levels of regret for both parties.)

It's not OK for Fox News & CNN to be political party propaganda machines. It's not OK for Twitter/Facebook/etc to censor only the right for their opinions. Having said that I think it's completely fair for them to kick them off their platform for perpetuating outright, destabilizing lies.

[fullstop]

That was their decision, and it's absolutely different than the government demanding that content is removed. The First Amendment applies to the government demands and not Twitter operating as a private entity.

[BitwiseFool]

It seems to me that if you really want to be a despot, you should own the companies that control the flow of information. The beauty of it is that the Bill of Rights don't apply to you and you're not obligated to respect the rights it gives citizens because you aren't the government.

[fullstop]

1. The government demanding that messages of private citizens be removed is a violation of their First Amendment Rights.

2. Twitter deleting content, banning users, etc, is entirely within their rights and is in no way a violation of anyone's First Amendment Rights.

Twitter is not a government entity. Full stop.

I'm currently sitting on some downvotes, which I find kind of unusual for a topic like this. Here's the text of the first amendment:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Which part, specifically, has Twitter violated?

[AnimalMuppet]

OK, but imagine some rich guy becoming president. Imagine that he owns some companies. Imagine that one of those is a media company. Imagine, for instance, Zuckerberg as president. He ran as part of party X. Now imagine that Facebook (not government, but a private company) suddenly starts deleting content that supports party Y. Is that a problem?

We just had a president with significant business assets, but he owned hotels. The next one may own media companies.

[fullstop]

There's some misunderstanding here. I'm not suggesting that there is no problem. I am saying that it is not violating anyone's first amendment rights and I am absolutely correct on that matter.

[BitwiseFool]

I concede that you are correct based on the letter of the law but I think the spirit of the law is being violated in a significant way.

[BitwiseFool]

>"Twitter is not a government entity. Full stop."

That's exactly my point. You can violate the principles of liberty freely as long as you aren't "the government". And the beauty of it is that people will defend you while you do it.

[AzzieElbab]

Why would you think that censorship of Trump was purely voluntary decision by the big tech?