> They wouldn't do that, because there would be justified public outcry
Where would the outcry happen?
There aren't that many public platforms with any reach, and they're all adopting similar policies.
In [blocked] no one can hear you scream!
Where would the outcry happen?
There aren't that many public platforms with any reach, and they're all adopting similar policies.
In [blocked] no one can hear you scream!
In practice, the distinction between banning a subject and banning a conversation about a subject ban, is easy to make. For example, Germany bans racist speech, but does not ban speech about whether racist speech ban should continue (and this particular debate is definitely alive and well in Germany). Even in the US we've banned certain words from broadcast TV for many years, but this never limited people from discussing whether the ban should continue!
Apparently not for Facebook’s moderators/censors workforce. Just they other day: https://mobile.twitter.com/OzraeliAvi/status/111040092879067... The day before that they banned a local satirical comics and this keeps popping up regularly.
And equally easy to abuse, something which has happened time and again:
Complain about the "ban of X"? Discussion shut down as supporting X.
At FB, Twitter, Snapchat etc, whoever happens to work in the subject banning division arbitrarily makes these decisions, unless overridden by top management.
Okay? Private organizations are under no obligation to provide you with a platform to spread your message.
If you want, you can start your own social network or host your own blog.