A few more thoughts on FAANG censorship.

Certain rights are so fundamental, so inherent to a free Republic, that the Founding Fathers did not see a need to write them into the Constitution. The right to life is the most obvious. The right to freedom of speech and a free press is another. They did understand that it was necessary to enumerate the freedoms of speech, assembly, religion, and the press as being protected from government. But they may never have contemplated the idea that a handful of companies could restrict and regulate what people were allowed to see, read, think, and hear.

True, this is not a 1st Amendment issue in the strictest sense, because the 1st only applies to government actors. However, this is a free speech issue. In Marsh v Alabama (1946), the Supreme Court noted “ . . . certainly the corporation can no more deprive people of freedom of press and religion than it can discriminate against commerce” and “Ownership does not always mean absolute dominion. The more an owner, for his advantage, opens up his property for use by the public in general, the more do his rights become circumscribed by the statutory and constitutional rights of those who use it.”

The above case was in regards to free speech issues in a company-owned town. FAANG is quite similar, in that they own private intellectual property (web hosting services, internet platforms, etc) which has been opened up for use by the public in general. Like the company-owned town in the SCOTUS case, this intellectual property has formed into communities where people conduct commerce, engage in social activity, and rely on the services available through the property. Therefore, the rights of Twitter, Facebook, etc DO become more limited when weighed against the Constitutional and human rights of its’ users.

...a true sign of a monopoly isn't how many you serve but who you can silence.

Will be interesting if it ever plays out in the courts.

Some on one side of the coin have been cheering about it and how they love it.

One day the shoe might be on the other foot and then it will be too late if it isn't already.

Did you see the Tweet about "Free Speech from users in Uganda about their election"?

Yes I did. Deplorable, disgusting hypocrisy. Execrable.

If I haven't said it plainly before, the right to free speech outweighs almost all other concerns to me. I don't care if speech is offensive, disgusting, or whatever. Dennis Leary said it so colorfully in Demolition Man: