Comment on X.com blocks access to Ekrem Imamoglu, leader of Turkish opposition
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 9 hours agoThe context is extremely important in this one. It changes the sentiment from “Musk is censoring the political opposition because he supports the government” to “Musk complied with the legal demands so as to not have to remove X from the entire country of Turkey, and is fighting the demands in court as he says they are censorship”.
X is now notoriously law abiding, but also notorious for fighting against government ordered censorship in court. They comply with legal orders so as to not face legal trouble, and then file legal challenges - even going so far as to pay for and help with legal challenges for individuals who the government are censoring.
Ulrich@feddit.org 9 hours ago
It’s not important. Elon did not say “I’m a free speech absolutist within the confines of the law”. Free speech absolutism does not make exceptions for law.
Further, those legal demands were made by a foreign country with no authority over him or his company. Here’s some helpful context: Elon doesn’t even recognize the local authority but suddenly he bends knee to authority demanded from the other side of the planet? Nah.
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 9 hours ago
It absolutely does when you’re running a business.
Companies operating in a country need to follow that countries laws, or they can’t operate in that country. Fact.
Why do you think the GDPR laws were such a big deal worldwide?
Ulrich@feddit.org 9 hours ago
It absolutely does not. If you’re running a business you simply don’t refer to yourself as a “free speech absolutist” because it’s fucking stupid.
Then a “free speech absolutist” would stop operating in that country. Fact.
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 9 hours ago
So you think the best way for a company to fight a government trying to eliminate free speech from their country is to……checks notes……remove their product that is used by millions from said country?
Not to take them to court to fight their attempts to stifle free speech, but to just……leave?