←back to thread

707 points patd | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.206s | source
Show context
mabbo ◴[] No.23322997[source]
> Public Service Announcement: The Right to Free Speech means the government can't arrest you for what you say. It doesn't mean that anyone else has to listen to your bullshit or host you while you share it.

> The 1st Amendment doesn't shield you from criticism or consequences.

> If you're yelled at, boycotted, have your show cancelled, or get banned from an internet community, your free speech rights aren't being violated. It's just that the people listening to you think you're an asshole, and they're showing you the door.

https://xkcd.com/1357/

replies(2): >>23323034 #>>23323145 #
gtCameron ◴[] No.23323034[source]
https://stratechery.com/2019/tech-and-liberty/
replies(1): >>23323483 #
devurand ◴[] No.23323483[source]
I think the position of this article requires a poor assumption with regards to the "marketplace of ideas." It assumes a majority of rational, fact-checking, good-faith actors which is just not the case in the real world. And without that particular check in place, falsehoods gain an undeserved advantage in the "marketplace of ideas."
replies(1): >>23323778 #
1. gtCameron ◴[] No.23323778[source]
So in this view, who gets to determine who is a "rational, fact-checking, good-faith actor" who should enjoy the privilege of free speech, and conversely, who should not have those same rights?