Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Republicans claim Twitter’s move violates the first amendment of the US constitution. Others argue that the first amendment says the government cannot restrict speech, but social media companies are private entities.
“[The first amendment] doesn’t give anyone the right to a particular platform, publisher or audience; in fact, it protects the right of private entities to choose what they want to say or hear.
While it's a dangerous president, it's also a dangerous precedent.
While Twitter et al have created the platform and run it, ergo they make the rules, it's in danger of degenerating into a hard left echo chamber which will become so woke it could collapse in on itself. General leftist behaviour on Twitter was to revert to cancel culture on anyone that didn't toe the line, with the last few years feeling like a race to be the most woke, with stories of lesbians being vilified because they weren't interested in men->women transexuals who were simply identifying as women. I've never been active on Twitter outside of sports tweets and news articles complaining about unfairness on there so wouldn't miss it. The other danger is that it will end up with a conservative platform spinning up and becoming a separate echo chamber, which is equally as concerning. The craziness of it all is that people are losing friends as a result of politics when the reality is that it's an elite-manufactured perception that you actually have any sort of real say in the running of the country.
The first amendment is as follows:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Until a social media platform exists that embodies that, the USA is not going to be a nice place.
Sent from my 5g carrier pigeon
“Brexit is having a wee in the middle of the room at a house party because nobody is talking to you, and then complaining about the smell.”
Republicans claim Twitter’s move violates the first amendment of the US constitution. Others argue that the first amendment says the government cannot restrict speech, but social media companies are private entities.
“[The first amendment] doesn’t give anyone the right to a particular platform, publisher or audience; in fact, it protects the right of private entities to choose what they want to say or hear.
Why? I appreciate darmy struggles to keep up because I've just had what I said repeated back to me by them, but I thought you were more intelligence. Clearly I mistook intelligence for a cretinous combination of arrogance and ignorance that is normally only reserved for AtW and other idiots.
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world that he didn't exist
Comment