So what is my proposed remedy? In case of social media giants it is to regulate them as public spaces. You don't get to pretend it is your living room when you invited entire country in and getting filthy rich charging admission.

In case of Ghomeshi's essay it is along "don't be an idiot" (not directed at anyone here) lines. Criticism of bad ideas. Criticism of people that endorse these bad ideas. Deplatofrming is massively, fundamentally bad idea. Doubly so for anyone involved in journalism. To me the issue is not about actual essay or content, the issue that some people decided that this specific individual has no rights to speak and they are using their power to enforce it. I honestly don't care what Ghomeshi has to say, however I do deeply care that there are some people who are hell-bent of preventing him from saying anything.

Quote
The danger with those platforms is proportional to their approach to monopoly, and the intersection of the first amendment is along that approach. I think monopoly is the true evil in this case, though, and fortunately (as you demonstrate) they are not quite there yet. I also agree that inequality of wealth is a significant evil behind asymmetric exercise of speech, but especially in regards to political speech.


I largely agree with you. However, these social platforms might be a natural monopoly. Like there isn't 'other' Internet, it just does not make sense to have two.

[Linked Image]