- Messages
- 78,402
Why does a company responsible to it’s $hareholder$, spin to adjust market perceptions? Yeah no idea mate. Is that a thing ?
In 2019, Murdoch declared there were “no climate change deniers” in his company.
Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Why does a company responsible to it’s $hareholder$, spin to adjust market perceptions? Yeah no idea mate. Is that a thing ?
So nothing to do with any requirement to be even handed, and possible illegalities, at least for the government?
Is he an antivaxer, or just not so keen on one in particular? Looks like you might be spreading some misinformation of your own.
This post literally says your expectation is that a media company SHOULD be biased and only post one side of something .... specifically the things you agree with, lol .... i thought we hoped the media were unbiased and balanced
Misinformation and disinformation are far more than opinions.
Semantics.
What are you talking about ? Oh the Requirement to Be Even Handed Act 2007 ? Is that still thing ?
Bullshit. An anti vaxxer is generally thought to be against vaccines, not just have questions about one. You should provide a source that shows this person is genuinely an anti vaxxer as you claimed or delete your post. We have rules for a reason.
How about the law that says the government can't suppress information or have others do it on their behalf?
What hypothetical worm hole are you disappearing into now? The Manly 7 were (are?) homophobes, and their refusal to play one game in a club-sanctioned jersey that had a teensy weeny strip of rainbow colour (and cost their club a finals berth) demonstrates this.
Which exact (US) law is that again....?
In the United States, freedom of speech and expression is strongly protected from government restrictions by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, many state constitutions, and state and federal laws. Freedom of speech, also called free speech, means the free and public expression of opinions without censorship, interference and restraint by the government.[1][2][3][4] The term "freedom of speech" embedded in the First Amendment encompasses the decision what to say as well as what not to say.[5] The Supreme Court of the United States has recognized several categories of speech that are given lesser or no protection by the First Amendment and has recognized that governments may enact reasonable time, place, or manner restrictions on speech. The First Amendment's constitutional right of free speech, which is applicable to state and local governments under the incorporation doctrine,[6] prevents only government restrictions on speech, not restrictions imposed by private individuals or businesses unless they are acting on behalf of the government.[7]
.
Did you miss the bolded bit? And are not aware that the FBI and other agencies were having weekly meetings with Twitter executives? And that they have a portal into Twitter where they can get content deleted. I guess so.Yeah, nah... not exactly. The right to free speech in the first amendment is quite different to people suddenly expecting a private tech company to have never had any rules or preferences about what speech is allowed on their free platform.
As previously mentioned, LU also has rules about what should and should not be posted here, and tools to ensure those preferences are upheld. All perfectly reasonable.
Twitter is a business, would get lobbied by all sorts of people from all sorts of angles to do all sorts of things, but makes/made its own choices to do what it wants with regards to freedom of expression on its platform. Can't see a legal case being built by anyone against Twitter for their suspecnsions or visibility filtering being a breach of the first amendment of the US constitition
www.mtsu.edu
emoji to every post. It just makes you look silly.
