zlacker

If said activists are part of a company that approves of their activities why isn’t their censorship legitimate? Commenters/posters are free to take their comments and posts somewhere else. Why don’t the “censors” get a say on what goes up on their platform?

>>EasyMa+(OP)
The activists aren't a part of the company. Facebook outsources fact checking to third parties.

>>mike_h+L5
They still control it, and it’s still their right as a corporation. I’m asking where is it wrong or in the US Constitution that says a company has to allow all points of view? That’s a moral call, and I can see people arguing that, but it is not illegal or amoral from the point of the company or those who say free speech/property rights apply to all

>>EasyMa+ha
Is anyone claiming it's illegal or that the constitution demands that?