You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Steemit could Massively Profit from Social Media Censorship
That would be true if there would be a free market for social media platforms, but there isnt, it's an oligopoly between: Facebook, Google (Youtube), Twitter & Reddit.
So pretty much these 4 corporations control the entire mass communication on the internet, and by censoring people they actually influence the public opinion a lot, which is a political risk.
If there would be like 1000 social media platforms and each one having millions of users, separately then your statement would be value, but since there are only 4, we demand free speech, since they control the entire market.
Several arguments can be made for free speech:
- US First Amendment
- Your content is your private property, therefore by deleting it, is a violation of your property rights.
- It is unfair to invite people to post on your website, but then later on your change your mind and delete the ones you don't like.
- Censoring people does cause financial harm, especially if a person built his career being an activist, and then his accounts get banned, a lot of work and investment goes in vain.
*.....etc
You know both a corporation's private property and your private property is valid. We need to find a balance between to make both parties satisfied.
However a corporation in monopoly is no longer a corporation, it's a Government.
That's hogwash. Anyone can start a new one at any time and many do. Have you heard of Ello? Gnu Social? Diaspora? app.net? Steemit?
They don't control anything other than their own websites. Users are free to use any site they wish, now as then.
Just because users actively prefer centralization doesn't mean that these companies are somehow in control of where the users point their eyeballs.