Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

theannotator t1_ja1tun3 wrote

Reply to comment by [deleted] in The Supreme Court Actually Understands the Internet by rejs7

Fox shows don’t get section 230 protections. Your examples do.

1

[deleted] t1_ja1upmj wrote

[deleted]

1

theannotator t1_ja1uwml wrote

But you can’t really go somewhere else in most cases. It’s a monopoly. Kill 230 or carve out these monopolies and you get a more free market approach.

2

[deleted] t1_ja1ve0u wrote

[deleted]

0

theannotator t1_ja1wh0e wrote

Well me hearty, when 98% of the market defaults to you that’s a monopoly. Businesses and the government largely aren’t on the others. Government shouldn’t use a private monopoly of a platform (twitter and YouTube for comma and google for finding info)that isn’t neutral for official communication.

It’s obvious we won’t come to a consensus, but it’s been nice having a discussion that didn’t include ad hominem attacks or bring up certain mustachioed men.

Good day!

0