I agree with you on the importance of free speech, but I can't see why private companies would be responsible for providing it.
If it is going to be a basic protected right (which I think it should) then it needs to be funded publicly.
I don't see how we can demand the freedom of speech by taking their freedom of action.
We need alternatives. Government incentives or investment would help, but if more of the public took it seriously, the problem would solve itself.
That's the real problem, according to me. People don't care or understand. Convenience and cost is more important than ethics or ideals.
I agree with you on the importance of free speech, but I can't see why private companies would be responsible for providing it.
If it is going to be a basic protected right (which I think it should) then it needs to be funded publicly.
I don't see how we can demand the freedom of speech by taking their freedom of action.
We need alternatives. Government incentives or investment would help, but if more of the public took it seriously, the problem would solve itself.
That's the real problem, according to me. People don't care or understand. Convenience and cost is more important than ethics or ideals.
I think the discussion that needs to happen pertains to the ability of institutions like Facebook and Twitter to restrict free speech. As quoted above:
The spaces they've created are, at this point, akin to public spaces. They're more or less obstructing freedom of expression, a right that is guaranteed under the US constitution among others. Without clear definitions it's too easy to move the goalposts.