The fact that private bodies can make their own rules doesn’t mean it’s not censorship. Things like the first amendment, and the right to freedom of expression aren’t the embodiment of free speech, the concept of free speech exists beyond them.
You’re using a no true scottsman fallacy by the way. I’m not sure if it’s intentional, but it’s bad logic.
You’re using a no true scottsman fallacy by the way
Today I learned.
I suppose what I meant is the pundits frequently hold up having their Facebook posts removed as state censorship, that this is somehow in violation of their constitutionally protected right to expression - and its not. It IS censorship by a private body in a forum completely of that private entity’s control, yet they wave the word censorship around to convince others that somehow its a shadowy conspiracy by the deep state or whatever to clamp down on freedom of expression.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !canada@lemmy.ca
The fact that private bodies can make their own rules doesn’t mean it’s not censorship. Things like the first amendment, and the right to freedom of expression aren’t the embodiment of free speech, the concept of free speech exists beyond them.
You’re using a no true scottsman fallacy by the way. I’m not sure if it’s intentional, but it’s bad logic.
Today I learned.
I suppose what I meant is the pundits frequently hold up having their Facebook posts removed as state censorship, that this is somehow in violation of their constitutionally protected right to expression - and its not. It IS censorship by a private body in a forum completely of that private entity’s control, yet they wave the word censorship around to convince others that somehow its a shadowy conspiracy by the deep state or whatever to clamp down on freedom of expression.