Alex Jones banned from twitter (compared, stunning, discrimination, facts)

[DC at the Ridge]

Originally Posted by Ultor

The 'rules' he signed up under no longer apply... they were rendered moot under Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University v. Trump.

Wrong.

[FatBob96]

Originally Posted by HockeyMac18

Why are you asking me? I've never said anything of the sort.

The NFL has every right to do whatever they want. Trump sticking his nose incessantly in it is another matter...but the NFL is free to do whatever it wants. It may not work because of the NFL player's union or for other business-related reasons - but they're free to try something.

Originally Posted by ClaraC

Yes. No disagreement.

Twitter (a private business) can tell a user he's in violation of the TOS and may not use their service.

The NFL (a private business) may also tell a player they can't take a knee during the national anthem if they choose to, the same way they won't allow players to deviate from the uniform during a game.

The public doesn't have a right, and the government doesn't have a right, to require that players not take a knee.

The NFL can realize they're in a sticky place here, and have concerns about alienating and causing bad will with their valuable players, and with their audience, and may have difficulty coming up with a policy.

Many on the Left do not agree with your opinions.


Here's the sticky reality of the situation.....


Just because a private company can restrict speech, doesn't mean that they should .

Twitter especially is so big and so widely used that it's on the verge of being a public utility.

Same with Google/Facebook etc.

[DC at the Ridge]

Originally Posted by Ultor

Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University v. Trump has changed all that.

The Court's decision has created 1000s (10s of 1000s?) of 'public forums' within twitter.

Until Knight v. Trump is overturned, Twitter may be forced to allow everyone access to those 'public forums' regardless of their own 'rules'.

Wrong.

[DC at the Ridge]

Originally Posted by Ultor

The court ruling applies to all government officials.

And the unintended 'easement by necessity' still stands whether it's 1 Twitter 'public space' or a million.

And Alex Jones isn't a government official.

And the rest of the ruling you are misinterpreting.

[HockeyMac18]

Originally Posted by FatBob96

Many on the Left do not agree with your opinions.


Here's the sticky reality of the situation.....


Just because a private company can restrict speech, doesn't mean that they should .

Twitter especially is so big and so widely used that it's on the verge of being a public utility.

Same with Google/Facebook etc.

They're not on the verge of being public utilities.

And I don't really care what other people think in regards to NFL player kneelings.

I do know what the first amendment says, and I understand it.

And of course a business should weigh its decisions in relation to speech. Why do you think the NFL hasn't "taken action"?

[ClaraC]

Originally Posted by FatBob96

Many on the Left do not agree with your opinions.


Here's the sticky reality of the situation.....


Just because a private company can restrict speech, doesn't mean that they should .

Twitter especially is so big and so widely used that it's on the verge of being a public utility.

Same with Google/Facebook etc.

I agree with that also.

Just because Twitter has many customers, doesn't mean it's a public utility though.

Just as Walmart isn't a publicly owned building.

[FatBob96]

Originally Posted by Catamount79

I'll bite, the players didn't agree to a rule from the NFL that required them to stand during the anthem.

When you sign up for twitter, you have to agree to a set of TOS in order to create an account.


Playing in the NFL or using Twitter isn't a right, if you want to do either of those, you have to accept their rules, currently there is no rule that states an NFL player must stand.

I didn't agree to any and all conceivable rules that my company might decide to implement in the future when I took the job.

But that doesn't mean that they can't make new rules and that I won't loose my job if I refuse to comply with them.

[Dane_in_LA]

Originally Posted by newtovenice

What TOS did he violate?

I think I've asked this 6 times now, and still no answer. From anyone on this thread.

Can't get good help anywhere these days.

[OpinionInOcala]

Censorship is inherently dangerous absent the dissemination of child pornography or direct calls to commit imminent violence against noncombatants.

[randomparent]

I'd like to bring up that C-D has the same policy of suspending or terminating posters for violating terms of service. I've been censured myself. That's the risk I run if I choose not to abide by the rules. And DC is right that this isn't an issue of freedom of speech. Jones retains his right to spew his vitriol. He just can't use Twitter as a platform to do it any longer.