I can see this being one of those Principle versus Politics challenges for some.
Which wins over?
Our dislike of Facebook, the politics of its owners, and the fact they seemingly push positions we don't like?
OR
Do we think the federal government should not be telling a private business what its politics should be and should not be attempting to control what they post, promote, or how they do so?
The second is the important point. It's a slippery slope IMO.
Yes, Facebook, Twitter, etc. are big, but they are private concerns and therefore set the rules. And no one is forced to use them.
Not to mention do we really want to open the door for something like the "Fairness Doctrine"? Remember when conservatives were against that?
Do we really want the government or a future administration to tell sites like Breitbart, etc., to be more "fair and balanced" and less biased toward their conservative agenda?
If conservatives want a conservative alternative to Facebook, then they should put up the money and build one.
FWIW, I’m on FB as are many of my friends and family who are mostly very conservative. I don’t see any of their political posts being censured.
I read articles of some who have claimed censure ship on FB but more often than not, they’ve violated the terms of service and posted inflammatory and “offensive†images and in some instances, I can understand why they got a time out. As I said Facebook is a private concern and it is free to use, so if the management doesn’t like you, they are within their rights to boot you off.
This is not covered by the 1st A.
Do we want liberals posting here if they are rude, etc.?
