I am not sure about this reasoning. I figured Social Media websites are more like a mall. It is private property, but it's also a quasi-public space. For example, you can't sell things in the mall unless you get the owner's permission. And, their private security can chuck you out for pretty much any reason.
Or it's like a communal corkboard in a college dorm. The first legal problem is that the owner of the website could not be held liable for what their users do. This is different than the corkboard, where the college can get knocked if they allow something dangerous or hateful to remain on the corkboard. Social media has managed to exempt itself from these rules because "those darn algorithms." Because a civilization that can produce self-driving cars & cooked-to-order vaccines cannot make an algorithms to weed out garbage posts on social media. Think about it, won't you? I digress...
Back on topic. The thing that makes social media different is not "everyone is on it, so it's public." It's the simple fact that publicly elected government officials use it as a platform to directly communicate with the public. Thus, if they represent me, they cannot block me except for good reasons (e.x., a person who only spams, & at a rate that makes other communication impractical.) However, if I am not represented by her, this would not apply. So, there are legal details to "iron out." Until they are, people will continue to explore their boundaries.
DISCLAIMER: I'm not defending Lora, I think she's a horrible human being. And, if it would upset her to know what I think, then I hope she knows! My only loyalty pledge is to the truth as I know it. Lora's loyalties obviously lay somewhere else, so we are natural enemies. But the truth always comes first.
"... akin to a public square of ideas."
I am not sure about this reasoning. I figured Social Media websites are more like a mall. It is private property, but it's also a quasi-public space. For example, you can't sell things in the mall unless you get the owner's permission. And, their private security can chuck you out for pretty much any reason.
Or it's like a communal corkboard in a college dorm. The first legal problem is that the owner of the website could not be held liable for what their users do. This is different than the corkboard, where the college can get knocked if they allow something dangerous or hateful to remain on the corkboard. Social media has managed to exempt itself from these rules because "those darn algorithms." Because a civilization that can produce self-driving cars & cooked-to-order vaccines cannot make an algorithms to weed out garbage posts on social media. Think about it, won't you? I digress...
Back on topic. The thing that makes social media different is not "everyone is on it, so it's public." It's the simple fact that publicly elected government officials use it as a platform to directly communicate with the public. Thus, if they represent me, they cannot block me except for good reasons (e.x., a person who only spams, & at a rate that makes other communication impractical.) However, if I am not represented by her, this would not apply. So, there are legal details to "iron out." Until they are, people will continue to explore their boundaries.
DISCLAIMER: I'm not defending Lora, I think she's a horrible human being. And, if it would upset her to know what I think, then I hope she knows! My only loyalty pledge is to the truth as I know it. Lora's loyalties obviously lay somewhere else, so we are natural enemies. But the truth always comes first.