Would a book store be a better analogy? Or a news stand? It is hard to find a perfect comparison. If we were to regulate Google, FB, Twitter, etc., what would that look like?
Censorship is hard to fine tune. Aside from shouting "fire" in a crowded theater, we've wisely not set limits on speech.
Would a book store be a better analogy? Or a news stand? It is hard to find a perfect comparison. If we were to regulate Google, FB, Twitter, etc., what would that look like?
Censorship is hard to fine tune. Aside from shouting "fire" in a crowded theater, we've wisely not set limits on speech.
There was a case some years ago in California where some people were making political speeches in a mall. It went to court, and the could ruled that even though it was private property, it was a public space, and the political speech had to be allowed.
I don't see this US Supreme Court adopting that kind of fine tuning. Maybe social media is sui generis and we will have to be creative. The question is: is there consensus that even hate speech is protected? Most people fail to understand that the First Amendment was designed to protect the minority and not the majority. Most people want to curtail speech they don't agree with - which obviously doesn't work.
Would a book store be a better analogy? Or a news stand? It is hard to find a perfect comparison. If we were to regulate Google, FB, Twitter, etc., what would that look like?
Censorship is hard to fine tune. Aside from shouting "fire" in a crowded theater, we've wisely not set limits on speech.
There was a case some years ago in California where some people were making political speeches in a mall. It went to court, and the could ruled that even though it was private property, it was a public space, and the political speech had to be allowed.
I think it would be something like that.
I don't see this US Supreme Court adopting that kind of fine tuning. Maybe social media is sui generis and we will have to be creative. The question is: is there consensus that even hate speech is protected? Most people fail to understand that the First Amendment was designed to protect the minority and not the majority. Most people want to curtail speech they don't agree with - which obviously doesn't work.