If you make what you consider to be an outrageous demand in negotiation and your opponent accepts it outright, you already screwed the pooch, because that means you or your team failed to gather enough intel on the other guy/group to know what their limits were.
The courts only rule in favor of progressives, and I don't see that changing without something drastic. You can't rely on that as an enforcement mechanism. The power must be removed from them in a way that can't be stopped. They have to be forcefully decentralized with one move.
Tie it to the company size, similar to anti-trust legislation. If you're big enough to squeeze out the competition (FB, twitter and youtube are way beyond that point) - then ANY censorship you do affects a persons total ability to speak because of your dominant market position.
Make it so that "muh private corporation" automatically stops applying when you reach a certain size. Regulate the fuck out of big tech and leave the little guy alone.
Big Tech has the money to fight all the claims against them, repealing 230 won't do anything to them, it'll just make everyone else liable on smaller sites.
MSM settled with Sandmann. That is even with curated scripts and teams of lawyers reviewing each broadcast. Google, Facebook, and Twitter are fucked because you have unhinged leftists posting shit every minute, not rehearsed TV hosts. I don't care how much money you think they have.
1A must be extended to the internet, fuck lolbertarians that claim it is "unconstitutional."
Sure, if you want to destroy the freedom of association. Religion is important, but I shouldn't have to cite religion in order to not be forced to bake the gay cake.
Platforms don't get to moderate. Publishers don't get civil immunity. Period.
Thank you!
Someone who understands you don't demand what you WANT you demand it far enough out that the compromise is what you WANT.
Reddit has no concept of negotiation since none of them earn their own money...it is so ridiculous.
If you make what you consider to be an outrageous demand in negotiation and your opponent accepts it outright, you already screwed the pooch, because that means you or your team failed to gather enough intel on the other guy/group to know what their limits were.
The courts only rule in favor of progressives, and I don't see that changing without something drastic. You can't rely on that as an enforcement mechanism. The power must be removed from them in a way that can't be stopped. They have to be forcefully decentralized with one move.
Tie it to the company size, similar to anti-trust legislation. If you're big enough to squeeze out the competition (FB, twitter and youtube are way beyond that point) - then ANY censorship you do affects a persons total ability to speak because of your dominant market position.
Make it so that "muh private corporation" automatically stops applying when you reach a certain size. Regulate the fuck out of big tech and leave the little guy alone.
When you're good, you're great.
MSM settled with Sandmann. That is even with curated scripts and teams of lawyers reviewing each broadcast. Google, Facebook, and Twitter are fucked because you have unhinged leftists posting shit every minute, not rehearsed TV hosts. I don't care how much money you think they have.
Sure, if you want to destroy the freedom of association. Religion is important, but I shouldn't have to cite religion in order to not be forced to bake the gay cake.
Platforms don't get to moderate. Publishers don't get civil immunity. Period.