The companies may claim that there is no discrimination based on political affiliation, but they also usually refuse to provide any details about exactly what actions were violations of the terms of service.
Discovery in a lawsuit would force them to provide information which may show a clear pattern of discrimination even if they companies claim otherwise.
Well, if they say "You can post here if you are a conservative, but you can’t post any conservative ideas, are you going to pretend they haven’t banned people for being conservative?
Hmmm…you can buy here if you are gay, but you can’t buy any cakes celebrating gay marriages?
They are more likely to ban someone who claims that they are formerly gay.
That is about the only sexual orientation that is not allowed.
Here are the details for you.
So what exactly did he post that broke their TOS?
Right, but there is no clarification about which “community standards” were violated and exactly what content caused the violation.
Without specifics it is impossible to compare Facebook’s actions to those of other posters with similar content, but different politics.
Is that what you think happened to Alex Jones? Do you think attacking the parents of the kids killed in Sandy Hook is a conservative idea?
From the article I posted.
we have taken it down for glorifying violence, which violates our graphic violence policy, and using dehumanizing language to describe people who are transgender, Muslims and immigrants, which violates our hate speech policies
Wouldn’t be illegal, but would damage their business.
I was not talking about Alex Jones. He is not of interest to me
March on down to your local NBC affiliate and demand they put you on the air so you can express your views. Get back to us on how that goes.
Again, when you show they have said the above, then we can talk.
I have many conservative friends and acquaintances…they post conservative ideas all the time.
Sean Hannity is on Facebook and Twitter.
Mark Levin is on Facebook and Twitter.
Rush Limbaugh is on Facebook and Twitter.
I could go on…shall I?
He’s the only reason why you guys are discussing this.
No, it would be pointless. Because this is about what a company can hypothetically be allowed to do, not what one has done so far.
As true as anything you say. I am discussing it as an interesting hypothetical.
Apparently this is a new area of law. Here is an article on point in 2013. That’s probably dated by now.
https://www.bairdholm.com/publications-feed/entry/is-a-website-a-place-of-public-accommodation.html
It may be not well developed due to there being few cases, as well as the relatively recent development of the web.
idiots?..
The hypothetical is that these platforms remove people who violate their posting standards. Do you think I should sue this board if I get banned?
There is no Federally protected political classification, so no. Whether it could be covered by some city that had such a classification…I would hope not.
So why hasn’t anyone sued?
You should let Alex Jones know about your legal theories
