I'm troubled by the pressure on tech companies to control hateful/dangerous speech.

[LAS14]

Think about the long term. A few compaines, controlled by individuals, get to decide what speech is OK and what is not. Wouldn't it be so much better for elected legislators to create laws which make it possible to define what is allowable speech? I THINK I've heard of some tech companies asking for congress to step up to the plate on this.

What do you think? Tech companies or legislators????

tia
las

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. If legislators tried to decide what acceptable speech is, they'd run smack into the First Amendment.

Any such law would be struck down faster than Trump can eat a bucket of KFC.

[LAS14]

2. What allows us to judge yelling fire in a crowded theater unacceptable? nt

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

4. There are a few very narrow exceptions. Hate speech legislation

has already been ruled unconstitutional several times; it does not fall into the imminent harm exception. Snyder v. Phelps and Matal v. Tam are the most recent Supreme Court decisions.

[MicaelS]

3. I am not.

1A only applies to government, not business. Under 1A the government can only restrict speech in very limited manners. Do you think all these RWNJ politicians would vote to restrict hate speech?