Hacker News Reader

Yeah, but this narrative is just as wrong and tired as the 'censorship' one. Companies are not obligated to carry your speech on their platforms, but we can and should be able to have a conversation about whether or not their methods of moderation are sound / reasonable.

View on HN

No you're wrong. Section 230 determines a publisher from a platform based on what they host on their service. If they pick and choose what goes on their service they are a publisher and lose their section 230 immunity. So it's not true that they can "do whatever they want."

And they do engage in censorship. See "Laptop from Hell" by Miranda Devine

re: section 230, it appears you've been corrected by others here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29667397

As far as whether or not these companies engage in censorship, I agree that they certainly do. It's just that it's not illegal/unconstitutional, as per the 'censorship narrative' alluded to.

Platform censorship is barely legal per my view of section 230 which I have studied thoroughly.

It's also highly immoral for them to craft their own narrative out of user generated content which was never the intention of 230. The crafting of a narrative of available information and the presentation thereof is called opinion which is the province of publishers.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com