Wrong, parler removes violent speech, has moderation. From their TOS
R)eported parleys, comments, or messages sent using our service will be deemed a violation of these Guidelines if they contain:
6.1.1 a “serious expression of an intent to commit an act of unlawful violence to a particular individual or group of individuals,” with either the intent or reckless disregard as to whether the communication will “place the victim in fear of bodily harm or death.”
6.1.2 an explicit or implicit encouragement to use violence, or to commit a lawless action, such that: (a) the Parleyer intends his or her speech to result in the use of violence or lawless action, and (b) the imminent use of violence or lawless action is the likely result of the parley, comment, or message.
I get it. Trust me i am not trying to judge. I am also not trying to be a fence sitter. I view social media as a huge problem that will lead to more violence but i don’t like seeing pr stunts by corps that limit free speech to corners of the internet.
How do you put the genie back in the bottle? You think Corporations are going to just let us put them in check again? Do you know how long it took to get anti trust laws in the first place?
Citizens United essentially ruled that corporations have 1A protections and thus their donations are considered exercising 1A. It also saw corporation campaign donations rapidly increase as they sought to influence elections.
Citizens United gave corporations significant influence on the government.
But now today, conservatives are complaining about how much power these companies have. It’s hilarious
