Posted on 08/14/2018 6:17:21 PM PDT by OddLane
How do we fight that injustice?
Exactly.
I thought that got settled with the lunch counter dispute in the 1960s. "Public accommodation" applies to any business that serves the public.
We need to apply even stricter standards to companies involved in the communications business. It is too critical to the well being of the nation to allow censorship.
Like it or not, as a business owner I can refuse you service for pretty much every other reason, including liking Trump or being long haired hippie scum.
So long as you are little, and your discrimination is insignificant to the larger scheme of things, such things are tolerable. When it directly influences a crucial necessity for our system of governance, than it is not tolerable, and we should do something about it.
I've not used or endorsed that straw man. In the future please only argue about what I actuallly say
Your specific argument of a "public accommodation" has some merit. But those companies can still apply their standards like any public accomodation and take down explicit calls for, or threats of violence. They can enforce language, no nudity, or whatever other standards they want, just like any other public accomodation. WIthout that we would have to eat dinner next to people dressed in their San Fran gay pride parade outfits.
The devil is in the details, but once Facebook becomes a "right" and not a commercial choice, then Facebook will be in power forever. There would be the same leftists running it and applying their leftist bias to which news gets pumped into feeds and many other selections. Facebook would easily swallow any potential competitors and stay dominant.
Right now Americans are fed up with Facebook. Your strategy is to keep Facebook in business by encouraging everyone to use it. You should be doing the opposite and helping kill it off.
Right. And it applies to discrimination based on race, sex, age or disability but not political belief or anything else.
Of course, you've been told this, and even referred to the relevant legislation, and choose to pretend that your argument still has merit.
...such things are tolerable...
Well then, get busy and elect people who will change the laws.
Last week I found an excellent essay about the various levels of censorship employed by YouTube. I'll see if I can find it for you.
Because every day people build a half trillion dollar internet company in their garage.
Wrong. I just wan the government to smash them with massive fines every time someone files a censorship complaint against them. (After adjudication, of course.)
No take over, just preventing them from misusing a communications system.
In communications systems, it *SHALL BE MADE* to apply to political beliefs, or we shall be destroyed.
Your worry about communication companies "private" property, shall cost us all our own private property.
Communications systems must always be the public commons. We must force it to be so.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.