Free Speech Platforms

Comments debate the scope of freedom of speech, emphasizing that constitutional protections apply only to government censorship and not to private companies' rights to moderate content on their platforms.

📉 Falling 0.4x Politics & Society
5,457
Comments
19
Years Active
5
Top Authors
#7328
Topic ID

Activity Over Time

2008
3
2009
29
2010
59
2011
57
2012
80
2013
54
2014
76
2015
92
2016
228
2017
379
2018
361
2019
498
2020
630
2021
982
2022
718
2023
429
2024
301
2025
475
2026
6

Keywords

w.r US EFF HN ACLU BS AT GOVERNMENT U.S speech free speech government freedom speech private freedom free private companies censor amendment

Sample Comments

loumf Jun 21, 2013 View on HN

"Freedom of speech" is a limit on the government, not on private companies.

pathseeker Oct 10, 2018 View on HN

Yes, talking about it is. Restricting it at the government level isn't. Freedom of speech is a right protecting you from the government, not companies.

jjk166 Nov 15, 2021 View on HN

Well for better or worse, our freedom of speech only limits government interference. You and I and every other private citizen is free to say, and to not say, anything they like within an extremely broad range. While private companies may have an ethical requirement to avoid censorship, they don't have a legal one. No matter how big their datacenters, no matter how large their audience, you don't have the fundamental right to force them to rebroadcast your message if they do not wish t

talmand Sep 20, 2012 View on HN

Yep, typically freedom of speech applies to government censorship. A private party can shut you out of their system as they have no responsibility to provide you with a platform. "Freedom of speech" is so often a misused/misunderstood concept.

dagenix Aug 6, 2018 View on HN

As a reminder to everyone: the constitutional guarantee to freedom of speech means that the _government_ cannot censor any views (outside of certain exceptions for threatening language, and the like). It does not mean that a private entity has to enable speech that they find objectionable.

morganvachon Mar 1, 2019 View on HN

I'm not conflating anything. I stated a fact, that the federal government cannot punish you for exercising freedom of speech, nor can it restrict your speech. Private companies aren't beholden to those restrictions on their own platforms. The person above the one I replied to was the one conflating the two, as I said.

marssaxman Jan 31, 2017 View on HN

The right to free speech constrains only the government. As a private individual or corporation you remain free to censor anything within your power. If Disqus doesn't want to work with Breitbart, they have no obligation to continue working with Breitbart, whether that decision is based on politics or anything else.

TylerE Sep 3, 2018 View on HN

No, of course not.Free speech, as codified in the first amendment, restricts what the GOVERNMENT can't do, not what a private company can do.Their microphone, their mute switch.

Godel_unicode Dec 28, 2018 View on HN

It's constitutionally protected from the government infringing upon it. As Facebook is not the government, they are perfectly free to limit speech in any way they choose.

nradov Sep 19, 2021 View on HN

Free speech in the US isn't absolute, but the Constitution prevents the government from banning most types of speech. By contrast private companies are free to ban anything they want on their platforms, for any reason or no reason at all. Whether it's morally right for powerful tech companies to use that power is another question entirely.