[themaninthedark]

There are several top level comments here acting like this is the first time the government has done something like this. It's not.

The previous administration was doing the same thing; Publicly saying that they wanted to change laws, that these companies were killing people etc. At the same time, they were also asking the companies to remove people for their speech. The threat was implicit.

I don't like that the current republican administration is doing it now, I didn't like it when the previous democrat administration was doing it then.

The only way to keep it from happening is for everyone to speak up, for that to happen you also need to recognize when your team is doing the same thing and call them out. Look at the comments saying "I bet we won't hear from the freeze peach crowd", of course you won't see them. Not because they don't care however but because their disagreement of the government action is getting lost in the noise of your crowds.

[UmGuys]

It's the first time the government in the US has done this. 100%.

I see. You're trying to pretend that intentionally subverting public health measures should be free speech and that the Biden administration did something like what the authoritarians are doing now. I disagree, though I'm not super familiar with the government intervention or lack of during covid. I have no desire to discuss it as it has no relevance to this context.

You're lying by creating a false equivalence and don't deserve replies.

[themaninthedark]

Free speech is free speech, it doesn't come with qualifiers about public health crisis or anything else. The old canard "You can't shout fire in a crowded theater" can from a Supreme Court case in which the government was prosecuting someone for an anti-war speech(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schenck_v._United_States). That was 1919, so maybe a bit before 2024.

The Supreme Court has been walking that back ever since(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio).

>There is no clearly established public health exception among the 43 judicially recognized exceptions to the First Amendment. https://www.thefire.org/news/blogs/ronald-kl-collins-first-a...

Please don't accuse me of lying, it's rude. Especially if you are also saying you are not familiar with what happened at that time.

It is a shame that you are unable to look at a situation where high level officials from one administration were asking why someone was allowed to express their views and that the administration was looking into how to hold them accountable and see how it is the mirror.

"Facebook needs to move more quickly to remove harmful, violative posts" - White House press secretary Jen Psaki

"Shouldn't they(Facebook and Twitter) be liable for publishing that information and then open to lawsuits?" - MSNBC "Certainly, they should be held accountable, You've heard the president speak very aggressively about this. He understands this is an important piece of the ecosystem." - White House Communications Director Kate Bedingfield

“We can do this the easy way or the hard way, These companies can find ways to change conduct and take actions on Kimmel, or there’s going to be additional work for the FCC ahead.” - FCC Chair Brendan Carr

[UmGuys]

You have an extreme point of view. You literally lead with it should be okay to scream fire in a theatre. That's absurd. There was a fire, more than a million folks died, many rules were altered including operation warp speed. There's no real reason to even reply to this insanity. Good job troll.

[UmGuys]

You're spouting nonsense to conflate the contexts. Here we had the FCC guy directly threaten people, they immediately cancelled the show and I assume hundreds of people's jobs. Why? Because the authoritarian was displeased with how he was characterized. This is precisely why we formed America and the 1st Amendment.