Your point is weird. Free speech existed before the pride flag. Banning the pride flag is obviously still restricting free speech.That is a content-based restriction and is already well-established to be unconstitutional. Doesnt apply in this case.
Tiktok is a weird platform filled to the brim with misinformation and Zoomers use it like we used Google in the mid 2000s. Something needs to be done.
Tiktok is a weird platform filled to the brim with misinformation and Zoomers use it like we used Google in the mid 2000s. Something needs to be done.there is no crackdown on podcasts or alt right radio/channels that spread misinformation to boomers and gen x. If it was about misinformation Joe Rogan would be the first to go.
Do you think the US should be taking cues from China on how we regulate our internet?
there is no crackdown on podcasts or alt right radio/channels that spread misinformation to boomers and gen x. If it was about misinformation Joe Rogan would be the first to go.
Just ban all social media.
I mean I'd also like if there was no F&F, Infowars, southern talk radio reminiscent of Rush Limbaugh, Rogan/Bench Appearo/Louder With Chowder either.I would prefer an FCC with more tools to regulate and actual teeth
Thats the plan
This is just xenophobia and racism wrapped up to look like privacy protection
And? That's still the same logic as your point. If your actual point was that TikTok has other issues that makes it reasonable to restrict then that's another argument entirely. And unfortunately constitutionality is dependent on what judges there are at the time. The Pride Flag can be seen as "obscene" by a group of of 9 Christo-fascist judges and thus restricted. Currently numerous politicians consider this bill unconstitutional as well.I dont think you understand the logic of my point at all, actually. Banning the content of expression is legally distinct from banning the manner of expression. Its already well-established that content of speech has more protections than the manner of speech. I should also say that politicians are not to be trusted as they have their own agendas.
And not reddit, 4chan, youtube where it originated?
The fact that Duncan has a more intelligent take on this than a chunk of people in this topic should really leave you guys thoroughly humiliated
Tiktok is a weird platform filled to the brim with misinformation and Zoomers use it like we used Google in the mid 2000s. Something needs to be done.Shit like OAN and other alt-right content is allowed to exist despite the fact that they actively promote fake conspiracies and insurrection. Hell, Twitter and facebook are also hives for propaganda.
Uh, no its not. Things like protests, churches, and public forums are manners of expressions the founding fathers very much had in mind when making the constitution. The first amendment specifically mentions freedom to assembly.You misread me. I said that there are more protections for content than manner, not that manner isnt protected at all. Whether or not TikTok is a traditional public forum is not well-established and isnt protracted n that sense. Youre reading your own bias into what Im saying.
Supreme court judges also have their own agendas as can be seen by everything thats happened the last few years. Politicians having their own agendas is also exactly the case here.
duncan still exists thought they banned him for life
Unregulated AI is more dangerous than tiktokFacebook and Snapchat as bad as this challenge
what does tiktok do different than meta or snapchat does currently?
Im referring to those protections too. There isnt more protection. Thats your false presumption.Is not a presumption, youre just flatly wrong about this. We dont have more free speech because TikTok exists, therefore we dont have less when it doesnt. The content of speech and the manner of speech are distinct, and the law does not treat them equally. Thats well-established. Goalposts firmly planted.
There are lots and lots of content that are limited for various reasons, even more in the past.
In any case none of that is relevant to or obvious from your point simply being There was free speech before X. Youre just changing the goalposts.
They'll say "because China owns it and uses it to spy on people"
But the true reason is it allows for the quick spread of soooooo much information they don't want to be spread
lets gooooooo, get fucked Commie appHope they ban temu next.