NightFox
Wildling
So says YOU, the law and common sense says otherwise and thank the heavens for it, if it didnāt neither of us would be posting ācurated, non-illegalā content on USMB right now.When Facebook curates the non-illegal content its members post, it's acting as a publisher.Every company is responsible for the content that the companyās directors, itās employees or designated representatives publish acting on the companies behalf. What Facebook isnāt responsible for is the content its USERS āpublishā on itās platform, same reason USMB isnāt responsible for USER generated content on its platform. However they are still required to remove ILLEGAL content (such IP theft, child porn, etc..,) posted by their users and can be held liable for not doing it.Indeed. Yet the socials insist they're platforms and are not responsible for their content.Publishers censor content they donāt agree with, always have,.By censoring ideas they do not agree with, they are a publisher, not a platform, and should not be granted the protections platforms enjoy.Sure it is, itās regulated but itās still free. Government isnāt inserting themselves into the transactions between Facebook and its customers (other than to take its cut), from what I understand they donāt have any special immunity to anti-trust laws though, I mean other than their ability to buy politicians that is.A private corporation given special dispensation from libel and anti-trust laws....That's not a "free market" by any stretch.Yeah but thatās a pretty easy call Oddball , given that Facebook IS a private corporation and NOT a government entity.Did I call it, or what?![]()
![]()
Facebook has all the same rights to regulate speech on its platform (I.e. itās PROPERTY) as you do to throw some schmuck off your property for planting campaign signs on your front lawn.
IMHO itās a good system that promotes free expression while protecting the private entities that facilitate it.