Dont feel sorry for anyone who feels they need social media to monetize their verbal diarrhea to be their source of income rather than actually working...
I'm old enough to remember when conservatives believed in private enterprise and private entities refusing the right to serve those who violated their terms of service. After all, you wouldn't want some random coming over your private property? Don't you love walls? I also remember them glorifying the virtues of competition. Of course the new cons believe in clamping down on media juggernauts who are unflattering to them and bitch and moan about it rather than compete with them in any meaningful way. e-grifting is serious business
Most of us still do. Private companies can and should refuse to serve whomever they want. You may have noticed (though you probably were so eager to reply, that you didn't) that my complaint wasn't against the private companies but the liberals who aren't standing up for free speech. The same liberals will boycott a chicken sandwich because its owner believes in God.
Regardless, that did not stop these same liberals for railing against a baker when the baker wouldn't bake a cake for a gay couple. I can name countless other examples where the concept of free speech - whether guaranteed through the Constitution or not - was fought for by people self-proclaiming to be "Liberals". Or do you deny that all of those protests - both in the past and in the future (please understand you will be clarifying your position at any time in the future with your answer) were also to be ignored and trampled on simply because there was no guarantee to free speech within the involvement of private enterprise?
Boycotting is one of the oldest form of freedom of expression in this country (Boston tea party). Your side wants to impose laws against exercising boycotts (Israel/Texas). You're entitled to backwards religious beliefs. You're entitled to not be thrown in jail for those beliefs. You're entitled to not be punched in the face for those beliefs. You're not entitled to other people's money or patronage for holding those beliefs.
I don't know what you mean "my side". I don't want any laws against boycotts. If someone wants to boycott, let them boycott. What type of law can stop that? Force someone to purchase from someone else? What lunacy. All I'm saying is that liberals, who are supposed to fight for the ability of others to say what they want (as long as it does not threaten someone else physically) are strangely silent when someone they don't agree with is trying to speak, and is unable to do so. You can make the argument about private enterprise being private, and how they get to restrict whomever they want whenever they want. You'd be correct. If the roles were reversed and big tech were predominately conservative, we both know (though you won't admit this, of course) that you and your "side" would be all over the news and up in arms over the silencing of a voice from the left - whether or not it was a Constitutionally sound argument. The fact that you pretend this is not so - that you, in fact, cheer it happening -and lean on technicality is just the latest example of your overwhelming partisanship and bias.
Bullshit. You don't hear me being up in arms when forums such as these or the fox news comment section moderate Lefty content. I'll mock it relentlessly sure.
LOL! You're suggesting this forum moderates lefty content? You have any examples of this? I'd really like to hear them. Besides, comparing the complete social media silencing of an individual to the supposed moderation on the fox news comment section isn't really an apples to apples comparison. Sorry, laughing my ass off at this stupidity!
Not saying this forum does, but don't hold it against forums that do. it's absolutely the same thing. The size or visits a website gets is irrelevant to them being private entities. Shame you can't see through your partisanship.