Responsive image

Up next


Youtube Censorship To Be SHUT DOWN By Supreme Court! Google, Facebook, Big Tech & Democrats PANIC!

77 Views
Published on 04 Oct 2023 / In Entertainment

The #1 Way To Support This Channel Is Backing Me On SubscribeStar
https://www.subscribestar.com/thequartering

Become A Youtube Member! It's The #2 BEST Way To Support!
https://www.youtube.com/channe....l/UCfwE_ODI1YTbdjkzu

All My Socials, Guilded Chatroom & More
https://linktr.ee/thequartering

Show more
Responsive image

Log in to comment

Life_N_Times_of_Shane_T_Hanson

https://nypost.com/2021/04/06/....justice-thomas-shows

But Thomas said “the more glaring concern” isn’t what Trump did to a few critics, but rather the power of tech giants to censor or ban users entirely, even the leader of the Free World. The justice expressed astonishment that Facebook and Google could remove Trump’s account “at any time for any or no reason.”

Wrote Thomas: “One person controls Facebook . . . and just two control Google.” Three people, in other words, have the power to disappear any of us from the digital public square, even a commander in chief. The Supremes, Thomas concluded, must rein in this unaccountable tyranny.

Big Tech apologists argue that private companies are free to censor as they please. And it’s true that the First Amendment prohibits only government from silencing viewpoints. But private ownership is never the beginning and end of constitutional analysis, not when there is so much at stake.

As Thomas showed, these companies are more like common carriers or public utilities than private companies. And they must be regulated as such: AT&T can’t refuse to open a phone account for you or limit your conversations based on your worldview. Likewise, Southwest Airlines can’t pick and choose who rides its aircraft based on their opinions about transgenderism or #Russiagate. Yet the tech giants get to do exactly that. Why?

Thomas also likened Big Tech to “public accommodations,” such as hotels and baseball stadiums, which are legally required to serve everyone and not discriminate.

Nor did Thomas buy free-market absolutists’ argument about competition limiting Big Tech tyranny. He pointed to the “substantial barriers to entry” facing newcomers. The fate of Parler proves the justice’s point. When the Twitter alternative offered a censorship-free platform, Big Tech colluded to crush it.

We’re facing a new form of censorship, in some ways far more sinister than the state-directed variety. Democrats and their media allies are happy to deputize Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg to censor the deplorables; there is no recourse or appeal, because the people doing the censoring are nameless, faceless Silicon Valley operatives.

   2    0
Show more

0

Up next