How benevolent! Zero fear as a person with insignificant reach and following, commenting on a tech forum (and under a nickname). What a feat!
Try having 0 fear as a journalist doing your job. Or as a whistleblower. Or as a content creator.
Even mere regular people expressing counter to the party line views in major issues on social media are fired, censored, harassed by the police, "fact checked" into social media bans, increasingly the target of new related laws (recent examples from UK, France), and so on.
Heck, just a couple of weeks ago students supporting Palestine in US universities were doxxed, threatened, and had a coordinated effort to render them "unhireable".
Do you know what censorship is ? Do you know how china enforce censorship ? and at what scale ? If so you can't say in good faith that EU = China.
A lot of these is outsourced governmental censorship.
And all of these support a single narrative, in lock-step about all kinds of issues.
>Companies firing people, advertiser dropping influencers, being fact checked, &c. has nothing to do with the government
Yeah, just happens to coincide with domestic and foreign policy agendas and narratives the government pushes, and government affiliated/sponsored overt or covert "fact checkers" and "independent bodies", all the way to direct orders from the government. Read on "The Twitter Files: The Censorship Industrial Complex".
The private sector companie don't have to be told what to do: they just see where the wind goes and act accordingly. Nobody was fired for being pro-narrative or for firing anti-narrative people. But increasingly they are also told what to do, threatened with related ("disinformation") or unrelated (taxes and such) violations, and such.
>Do you know what censorship is ? Do you know how china enforce censorship ? and at what scale ? If so you can't say in good faith that EU = China.
No, but I can say that I give very few fucks in what China does, but as a person in the EU I give many fucks what the EU does, and how the public discourse is getting increasingly less open than in past decades.
(I wouldn't give much fucks about what the US does internally either, but unfortunately, unlike China, they also export it)
“There's no evidence — that I've seen — of any government involvement in the laptop story."
Which is actually pertinent to the discussion, as opposed to Biden's son laptop.
Of course it's free to ignore or actively reject all such requests from an entity like the government. Kind of like how a shop owner is free to ignore requests from the goodfellas that pass by and say "Great shop you got here. It would be a shame if anything happened to it".
https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/4198285-missouri-v-bid...
Note how nowhere in this thread I said "EU = literal China" or anything to that effect.
lol
Journalists, whistleblowers, and content creators in the west are living in fear of governments targeting them for saying things the government doesn't like?
Or are you notorious for making it ad-hominem, and of putting statements in other people's mouths they didn't make?
Yes, I frequently hold opinions "in contradiction to other people’s statements" and state them. I wouldn't do it if I knew that such blatant individuality isn't approved!
Though surely "putting out public statements in contradiction to other people’s statements" is true for any non trivial statement one can make about a subject that has at least two sides: it would be in contradiction with some people's statements, and in agreement with other people's statements.
So, isn't your accusation basically boiling down to: "putting out public statements in contradiction to [your preferred people’s] statements"?
(1) And isn't that a pretty low bar to be happy about?
If find it abhorrent, even if it passes the low bar of "not equal to China" (which I find irrelevant). Do you disagree with that?
So your whole hysterical “private companies can’t stand up to this!” is actually adding to the problem by giving the impression they cannot. In reality, they can, they should, and they very often do.
So much for "stronger free speech protections".
If someone who says they agree with free speech says talking against this is "hysterical", I'd like to see what those against free speech say.
Or would it just be forbidden for Twitter to look at that report and then remove the content?