[rabite]

> If I own a platform I’m not under any obligation to allow you to say whatever you like on that platform.

Before the Internet this was not the case. In Marsh v. Alabama, it was ruled (in line with all previous precedent) that privately owned roadways and sidewalks had to allow religious pamphleters, even though it is private property. The court asserted that anywhere that is the forum for public discussion is de facto allowed for political and religious speech regardless of property rights. In the very early days of the Internet things changed, when people tried to assert First Amendment claims on Compuserve chats. Compuserve claimed they weren't the public square, that they were a private service. I think they were correct, in that Compuserve was a very marginal private space and couldn't possibly have been "the public square". But precedent over this tiny service were eventually laundered into much larger and more critical bits of social infrastructure.

In contrast to Compuserve, Twitter and Facebook are definitely the public square. You cannot petition for a redress of grievances or lobby for policy changes without using them. And the political left delights in suppressing their opponents on them but files lawsuits claiming their rights are infringed when they aren't given access to every inch -- such as when they sued Trump for blocking them on his Twitter account:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/supreme-court-dismisses-trump-t...

When Democrats were barred from interacting even with a very small part of a platform, it is a critical First Amendment violation. When conservatives, racists, sexists, or whatever term you want to use are barred, well, it's a private company bigot.

This hypocrisy must quickly end, or we as a country will end up in a violent conflict. There must be open, public debate on every major platform, and Americans must be entitled to express their opinions because the only other alternative is violence.

[andrepd]

You're spot on (I say this as a lefty). Big social media like fb, instagram, twitter, et al are bigger and more important than any physical public square that ever existed. They are way way WAY past the point where they need to be treated as such and regulated as both a public forum for 1A purposes and as a utility like phone or mail for privacy protection and non-discrimination purposes.

Just don't pretend that trying to censor people on social media is somehow a trait of the Left (in fact, in a thread about the right doing precisely that!)

[palata]

> This hypocrisy must quickly end, or we as a country will end up in a violent conflict

The country is currently massively pushing for violent conflict abroad...

[genewitch]

Thanks for typing this.