These forums don't control the majority of communications in this world.
And ouch, you trying to be all edgy all of a sudden? Didn't think you were so passive aggressive.
Printable View
You don't think a business should beable to control what happens on their platform? You think the Government should control it all? Sounds like communism to me.
Actually what the YouTube CEO said they are doing is, but you must have woke up and been on your "I'm just going to be right no matter how shallow an analysis it is" kick today.
I said - if the business remains a "public forum" they should retain their 230 protections.
If they are not, and are going to censor content based on their personal beliefs and not on the basis of the First Amendment, then they should lose their 230 protections.
That is not communism. That is ensuring a company doesn't stifle your, mine, or anyone else right to freely express ideas, while still earning government benefits from censoring you.
Drink your coffee Gelston and wake up this morning. Your better than this shallow drivel you're spouting.
You're literally a broken record on this topic. The private sector dictates the terms and conditions of the use of its service, including the ability to moderate violent and objectionable material, if you don't like it you're free to use any one of hundreds of competing platforms. Most of them have the same standards, so good luck.
What you and your conspiracy theorist cronies want is unfettered access to the massive subscriber base of YouTube, for the hope of monetizing your hate speech and tinfoil had causes. This is a pipe dream and instead of spamming all of us with your alt squad, why don't you apply your energy to making a sympathetic content hosting service the next YouTube. You can call it WhiteTube or FreedomForum and you and all of your buddies can bask in your echo chamber all day long.