It's true most companies like this do have the right to NOT post / publish but they don't really have the right to say we are not posting this because you have violated lets say election interference which was defined by the the Democratizes like they did with the Biden laptop . So the problem is how to navigate ideas of whats good for t…
It's true most companies like this do have the right to NOT post / publish but they don't really have the right to say we are not posting this because you have violated lets say election interference which was defined by the the Democratizes like they did with the Biden laptop . So the problem is how to navigate ideas of whats good for the general public and what not to publish and how is that defined . If you read meta general guide lines https://about.meta.com/regulations/ there is the idea that they are protecting you when they are editing what you can see in a political direction . So you should be able to sue based on this false narrative of protecting you , they are not . If Meta just said we reserve the right not to post anything at anytime for any reason then they would be safe , but they would never do this because people would leave them and thus they lie and that you could sue for , if it caused harm .
If a company didn't want a law suite , they would change there rules to be absolute but they won't and thus you have a case to sue for a lie that would cause harm and trust me people do and can sue . This is more of a lie issue on Meta part , in that there rules say they can edit/delete posts for the general good , when that is not easy to define and thus they will lie and open them self's up to be sued .
I appreciate that individuals (both as individuals and as part of the general public) need no "protection for our own good" (either from gov't or social media), but whether it is a false narrative or not, the terms of the agreement between a platform and its users is just that: terms of AGREEMENT.
It is just as important to recognise how important property rights are when arguing for Free Speech. No user has the right to demand that a platform has the obligation to post the user's comments. That would be a violation of the platform's property rights and against Free Speech (the platform is exercising its own Free Speech rights if it chooses not to post a comment).
It's true most companies like this do have the right to NOT post / publish but they don't really have the right to say we are not posting this because you have violated lets say election interference which was defined by the the Democratizes like they did with the Biden laptop . So the problem is how to navigate ideas of whats good for the general public and what not to publish and how is that defined . If you read meta general guide lines https://about.meta.com/regulations/ there is the idea that they are protecting you when they are editing what you can see in a political direction . So you should be able to sue based on this false narrative of protecting you , they are not . If Meta just said we reserve the right not to post anything at anytime for any reason then they would be safe , but they would never do this because people would leave them and thus they lie and that you could sue for , if it caused harm .
If a company didn't want a law suite , they would change there rules to be absolute but they won't and thus you have a case to sue for a lie that would cause harm and trust me people do and can sue . This is more of a lie issue on Meta part , in that there rules say they can edit/delete posts for the general good , when that is not easy to define and thus they will lie and open them self's up to be sued .
I appreciate that individuals (both as individuals and as part of the general public) need no "protection for our own good" (either from gov't or social media), but whether it is a false narrative or not, the terms of the agreement between a platform and its users is just that: terms of AGREEMENT.
It is just as important to recognise how important property rights are when arguing for Free Speech. No user has the right to demand that a platform has the obligation to post the user's comments. That would be a violation of the platform's property rights and against Free Speech (the platform is exercising its own Free Speech rights if it chooses not to post a comment).