We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/12/09/stanford-anti-lockdown-professor-jay-bhattacharya-secretly-blacklisted/
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-twitter-blacklisting-of-jay-bhattacharya-medical-expert-covid-lockdown-stanford-doctor-shadow-banned-censorship-11670621083
Ironically, Taibbi worked for liberal Rollingstone and Weiss worked for liberal NYT and both are liberals themselves, but now wokes are smearing them as fascist and cancelling them 🤣
If we don't receive a reasonable attempt at a response, we'll mark the thread as trollish for being non bona fide.
1. Why exactly would Vijaya Gadde face legal action? Twitter was / is a company, they are not bound to protect freedom of speech under the US constitution. So what action are you imagining can be taken exactly?
2. Please provide evidence or what you mean by 'wokes' are 'cancelling' them, other than some random people on Twitter being mean to them.
3. Don't know this Weiss fellow, but to describe Taibbi as 'liberal' is too easy. He's a bit hard to pin down - perhaps liberal on some social values and not a Trump supporter, but fundamentally Taibbi seems to be heavily into free speech, potentially allied to Elon's brand of free speech absolutism, which puts him into the libertarian / right-wing camp as much as liberal.
Mind you, he's not wrong on his and others' longer-running criticism that it is worrying that private companies like Twitter and Facebook have so much power to decide what is and what is not acceptable speech, but that's really about the concentration of power in Silicon Valley / the world of finance in the hands of a few, who are largely unaccountable.
Guess what: the only thing that would help there is more government regulation (eugh, only liberals like that), not less: if you leave it to the companies to regulate content, they will end up removing content they will legally be required to remove, and stuff that advertisers don't like, and stuff that their staff are uncomfortable with, including racist content, CSAM, calls for violence, disinformation, etc. How would you have platforms like Twitter 'solve' the inappropriate content problem?
What if you have a sitting president who is regularly undermining trust in democracy by claiming without evidence an election was stolen, resulting in a riot and loss of life / coup? How would you deal with it, if at all? And if you choose not to deal with it, what service do you think is being served?
And lastly, how is Elon's ownership of Twitter making it any more accountable? Because he tweets out polls every now and then to his echo chamber about making important policy decisions?
Why did Elon block Kan(ye) West's account? By a similar yardstick that's being used to criticise Trump's blocking, is that not censorship of a potential future Presidential candidate?