wijg

Your argument falls well short because YouTube and Google are not a monopoly. Not even close. There are dozens of viable alternatives to google products.

I think their censorship is shitty. But it's not illegal.

EndThePizza

http://reason.com/archives/2016/12/06/the-reddit-revolt-and-the-future-of-soci

Private entities have the right to censor speech, but there's a difference between rights and obligations. So there's not really any conflict between the right to censor and an obligation based on an implied agreement.

I do agree they have somewhat of an obligation/expectation from the pubic to allow free speech, and I also think it's in their best interest. Most people want some censorship to the things they read each day, so social media will accommodate them. But there's a threshold to how much they can censor before it turns too many people away. For example, I believe Eddit has screwed itself and will be replaced by voat within a few years.

But - you can't sue someone for a breach of a social expectation.

VictorSteinerDavion

Lawyers are literally balls deep in this issue.

I myself will be staying as far from them as I can.

Wellwerefucked

You realise that the people we are up against give absolutely Zero fucks for the constitution or any amendment.... hense why we're here....

Bulgakov

Thank You and That makes perfect sense, I was just reading about David Seaman and read a similar comment, the person said "publicly traded" companies and not legally allowed to censor users w/o legal merit, I'll amend the post and and put "public" instead of private but the problem still remains. PizzaGate needs a legal team, and I'm sure we have the numbers to easily pay for it.