> Thirdly, if a social media platform is a vehicle for communication by elected officials, should that platform be allowed to limit citizen's access to said politician. I believe the courts already ruled twitter cannot deny people access to trump's twitter. But I'm not sure.
How does this square with the fact that Donald Trump regularly blocks people from viewing his Twitter account for disagreeing with him or refusing to acknowledge his (apparent) infallibility? Is that not a much more egregious violation, and by an actual government official to boot?
> How does this square with the fact that Donald Trump regularly blocks people from viewing his Twitter account for disagreeing with him
He can't block them. That's my point.
"Trump can't block users from his Twitter feed, federal judge rules
Blocking users from viewing his Twitter account is unconstitutional and a violation of the First Amendment, according to the judge."
> And yet he continues to do so [1] and continues to fight for his right to do so.[2]
And I'm against it as long as it is an american behind the account.
> Somehow the right-wing rage machine never takes on that particular free speech battle. Strange isn't it?
Nothing strange about it. People with agenda all want censorship when it suits them. This entire thread is chock full of left-wing rage machine defending censorship just because it suits their ideology.
Left-wing rage machine and right-wing rage machine are ultimatel the same thing. They want control and obedience.
How does this square with the fact that Donald Trump regularly blocks people from viewing his Twitter account for disagreeing with him or refusing to acknowledge his (apparent) infallibility? Is that not a much more egregious violation, and by an actual government official to boot?