Quote:
Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction
These things will govern themselves in the long run. If one platform gets too restrictive (or isn't restrictive enough), people will go to another platform. If the market is there, it will do well.
It's really no different than other forms of media. TV networks have restrictions on content. You can't go the Cooking Network and try to promote weird conspiracy theories about elections. You can go on FOX News and do it, and apparently there is a market for it. Any website should be free to filter any kind of content they want to distribute, just like TV, radio, print media, etc... Like the other forms of media, if there are various audiences that want their own thing, it will materialize at some point.
For a long time, the World Weekly News was one of the biggest selling publications, but that doesn't mean the New York Times or Boston Herald are biased or harming freedom if they don't let them run stories about the Bat Boy in their papers.
|
That assumes that Google/Apple don’t have the power to regulate everything. It is no longer possible regardless of googles or apples behaviour to create a new operating system for a phone and get any meaningful market penetration in any reasonable amount of time. The barriers to entry are too high.
Social media competitors are currently either bought or features copied prior to becoming dominant.
ISPs are held a a few centralized people
Revenue through internet ads on the internet is effectively controlled by Google and Amazon.
The FCC broke up cable companies and stopped mergers of media companies to prevent what is currently happening on the internet.