7 ms·

Well, they didn't discriminate. They simply used their right to free speech on their platform to add additional information. So are you arguing that the presid

Well, they didn't discriminate. They simply used their right to free speech on their platform to add additional information. So are you arguing that the president has a greater right to free speech than Twitter?

stale2002 6y ago
> They simply used their right This isn't how common carrier laws work. The way that common carriers laws work, is that companies that are subject to them do not have the right to pick and choose who they sell to, if they want the protections that theses laws provide. Twitter isn't currently subject to these rules. But these laws already exist, and are uncontroversial, and could be extended to other platforms. For example, if Twitter lost it's current content immunity, by being deemed a publisher, then it would be subject to significant liability, and may have to change up how it runs itself