What's the difference between this and deplatforming? I'm not necessarily against either. How's a media company like Facebook or Twitter different from a library? Both disseminate information. The latter is owned by the public. I'm honestly just asking.
If you think about it, it's not really against free speech, because you can still obtain a book through other means. A lot of people on this website think that social media companies should prevent the spread of disinformation on their platforms, and defend this view against allegations of censorship by saying that since it's a private company censoring someone's speech on their own platform, it's not a violation of free speech.
Also, I'm trying to see where the line should be drawn: Pornography shouldn't be allowed in public libraries, no?
> Pornography shouldn't be allowed in public libraries, no?
Why not? Arguably, a library is the best place to place pornography within a proper context as an entertainment/leisure media with social and cultural repercussions and that necessitates additional education to engage with in a healthy way. And to the extent public libraries are supposed to be a socialized equivalent of private libraries - you don't think rich people have a shelf full of porn?
I think America would have much saner attitudes towards sex if most people's first encounter with porn was in a public and literary context rather than the seedy isolated mess it usually is.
(Note that "allowed" is different than "must be in" - a library may choose not to circulate anything for many reasons including low demand and difficulty of handling/maintaining the materials, both of which I imagine is the case. Nonetheless I also suspect virtually all public libraries have some pornography in their collection and plenty probably also in circulation.)
> How's a media company like Facebook or Twitter different from a library? Both disseminate information. The latter is owned by the public. I'm honestly just asking.
If you think about it, it's not really against free speech, because you can still obtain a book through other means. A lot of people on this website think that social media companies should prevent the spread of disinformation on their platforms, and defend this view against allegations of censorship by saying that since it's a private company censoring someone's speech on their own platform, it's not a violation of free speech.
Also, I'm trying to see where the line should be drawn: Pornography shouldn't be allowed in public libraries, no?