Ok so I get that Facebook and Twitter might not like me calling Nazis racist cunts and will ban me for that. Ok, private corporation and all that.
However, in my mind, Android and IPhone are utilities, as is the internet. So when Parler starts to get banned from said platforms that really starts to feel like censorship to me.
Websites are a thing though.
This gives me a chubby chortle
They are. The question is whether smart phones have become public utilities. I’m starting to feel that they have. Just my thoughts.
While I am personally amused that Parler got deplatformed, I see merit in discussing the broader implications about choke point control over access to such things.
To clarify, could one install the Parler app directly on their phones without going through the app store?
I have no love nor even an interest in Parler but if It’s going to be banned from those platforms for not policing its users then twitter should go as well, it’s abused by both the left and right and has been responsible as a service for an untold amount of shit storms.
Is it just an app, or is it a website as well? If it’s also a website couldn’t someone just forgo the app stores altogether and just use their browser?
Look I really don’t care about Reichbook getting their app pulled in and of itself. I’m more disturbed by Android and IPhone deciding which social media platforms we can have access to.
I’m sorta OK with private corporations in the way of social media sites deciding what content is appropriate on their sites. I’m not OK with a private corporation deciding what I can look at on the device that I paid my hard earned cash for.
This is actually an intellectually challenging question.
Private companies can decide what to allow on their platforms so if they don’t want to allow something in their app store, I don’t see how or why they should be compelled to do so. If I have a grocery store, you can’t force me to stock a certain product.
Smartphones are a little different as has been pointed out. However, you do agree to the terms of service for the OS that operates on them. Arguably the OS is also a product provided by a private company, which can decide what to include or not include in them.
Theoretically, there’s nothing that would stop someone from developing their own smartphone and accompanying ecosystem for their own use or to offer for sale. Alternatively, an open source community could be created as well. How feasible is that in reality? Probably not very. Yet there could be quite a market for it with a significant disaffected user base that doesn’t agree with the decisions of the existing market leaders.
While highly inconvenient, you could also just have a generic flip phone for calls and texting and use a computer to access other content via the internet if you were to opt out of the existing smartphones.
Nobody is having their rights infringed.
These people are still free to associate and foul the air together.
The only requirement is that they be smart enough and respectful enough to not make it a public nuisance.
Obviously that is asking too much from the peanut gallery on the right.
Censorship never ends well
Define censorship. The government isn’t stopping Parler from existing.
The suppression of speech, public communication, or other information, on the basis that such material is considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or “inconvenient.”
The problem is , whilst policing of expression may be acceptable with a beneficent government, the same regulations will be used to repress the population should a tyrant gain power
How about “inciteful”, “seditionary”, or “insurrectionist”.
Whilst it remains speech or thought it remains protected
Criminal acts based on that speech should have repercussions for both perpetrators and instigators
Protected by what exactly. Your opinion?
Actually, there are laws in your country, and my country, against these types of speech.
The Germans have had to deal with this for almost 100 years.
And all of those apply to social media companies, so Parler just FAFO what happens when half your users are plotting to thwart government operations.
Protected by law
Which law would that be.
Before you answer you should know that since 1937 in Ireland, the law has been:
“The publication or utterance of blasphemous, seditious, or indecent matter is an offence which shall be punishable in accordance with law.”
In your case the 1st Ammendment
in mine, Common Law and acts of the Dail