Right so it would seem Twitter is a publisher. I'm fine with that. Who wouldn't be? But whether it is or not it has the right to take down content. And I think it should do so if it thinks such content is misleading the public.
Okay. But when Twitter or whoever takes your post down, how does treating them "as a publisher" help you? It doesn't. They have a 1st Amendment right to do that.
I agree with this one, as much as I hate to say it. Twitter pays to host its website, the infrastructure, advertising, etc. So just as a company would have you escorted off the premises or arrested for saying something they don't like, Twitter should have the right to moderate their platform as they see fit. Though my personal belief is that no information should be censored except child pornography.
Twitter is a private sector business in the US with terms that include reserving the right to remove any content for any reason. They have every right to.
If you don’t agree with it, for moral reasons or otherwise, you’re free to provide your own service.
Anybody, including the government, should be allowed to contact a publisher, point to something it is publishing on its site, and ask, “Hey, do you think that might violate your terms or editorial standards?” and leave the ultimate decision to the publisher. My understanding is that this is all that happened with Twitter.
On other hand if Twitter is publisher and control what is published. They should be held responsible both criminally and financially of everything they allow to be published on their platform.
Seems entirely fair and reasonable? And not in anyway against their free speech. All speech there is theirs. Be it inciting violence or illegal graphical material. Some gets past their censor they are responsible also.
That's where things are getting confused. Anything Twitter publishes is 100% their speech, and they have a free speech right to say what they like, and not say what they don't like.
They claim to be a platform, not publishers, so they shouldn't be able to invoke publisher rights and be the judge of what can or cannot be published. Let the government do this mediation. Twitter should let people ask a judge to issue content take downs based on the law and just comply with it.
IIRC there are actual documents/comms between the current administration and twitter regarding the request for removal of content and contributors. I believe that this makes twitter a de facto NGO and therefore they should be subject to the enforcement of the first amendment.
I mean, I disagree with (some of) platforms' content removal, but I don't disagree with their legal right to do so.
If Twitter becomes a propaganda machine deleting any tweet it disagrees with, I think that's shitty and if I had an account I'd delete it to avoid participating, but I'm not sold on why the government should make that illegal.
People and private organizations currently have the right to propagandize in the U.S. (without explicitly calling for violent uprisings, etc). What's the major difference between Twitter moderating tweets and a privately-owned forum moderating comments?
Totally agree with you. Twitter should be publishing whatever the user wants to convey (unless its violating any local laws). They shouldnt be deciding whats right or wrong based on their personal opinion.
Yes but those details are what has protected twitter until now. If you decide what goes on and not off your platform, then you are a publisher and responsible for what’s on your platform. The law says this.
I am interested in what you think about that, ignoring Trump for a second.
If Twitter wants control over what's published on their site, then they give up their rights (their 'free harbor'-alike protections) to not be held responsible for the content they censor and let through.
Twitter et al. are where modern speech happens. They pushed themselves into this position, and thus upholding the human right to free speech also falls upon them.
So long as Twitter is not shut down, then perhaps some government oversight (to the limit of holding Twitter responsible for what and who they censor) is appropriate.
Free speech, in this case, trumps my intense dislike of our current administration.
It is censorship which a private company like Twitter is perfectly entitled to perform. I have no problem with them doing this. Every company decides on its view of the truth to present to the world.
There's no inherent human right to be on Twitter, access its contents or contribute to new content. It is private property and you give away the rights to publish your speech, as per their site policies. So removing content or accounts, is not by law censorship in such an arrangement. That people freely choose to use such arrangements and contribute to others' private property, is questionable.
reply