Comment on Sex-ed content creators discuss shadowbanning and censorship on Meta platforms

• Adalast@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Already happens. Facebook and other message systems have content filters built in to their chat systems.

  source

  • runefehay@kbin.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    And in the early days of the telephone, switchboard operators would listen in on conversations and cut off anyone they didn't like. Then in civilized countries, they required phone companies to be common carriers and required police to get warrants if there was anything illegal suspected, to listen in on someone.

    Similar thing with the postal service.

    source

    • Adalast@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Yup, as I mentioned in my other response to Mr. Strawman that is the difference between a private corporation and a utility. Utilities ARE subject to the first and fourth amendment protections because they are a strange hybrid between public and private.

      source

      • runefehay@kbin.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Yes, but Meta/Facebook is essentially positioning itself as a monopolistic utility by buying out all its smaller competitors and leveraging itself as one of the few players in the market. There are a lot of people, who if you want to talk to them or see what they have to say, you have to get a Facebook account. This includes politicians and small businesses.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Why did you say it already happens in phone and SMS communication, then name a company that does neither, and reference other services that explicitly are neither, as an example of this happening?

    “People are already dying from stubbing their toe, just look at all the deaths caused by car accidents!”

    source

    • Adalast@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Way to strawman my man. SMS is not the only mode of communication and SMS and cell phone communication in general fall under a whole litiny of laws because they are considered a utility along with landlines. This extends the constitutional protections for the first and fourth ammendment protections to them. Your initial suggestion was a fallacious argument to start because utilities are not wholly private corporations, and thus do not qualify for the initial discussion. I tried to save it by suggesting that alternative means of communication which are utilized that serve the exact same purpose as SMS and telephone calls but are controlled wholly by private corporations DO fall victim to arbitrary censorship and it is allowed because they are not subject in their business dealings with consumers by any state or federal oversight.

      source

      • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        <.< At you unfamiliar with quest a strawman is? I never stated what your position was, I just repeated what you yourself did, and gave a similar example. Unless you thought I was saying your position was about stubbing toes?…

        source