Free Speech

[Phoebe]

I cannot say I feel bad that Parler has had to shut down, but it does concern me insofar as I don't understand how such platforming works. Could they simply decide to offer their service on some other platform, some other company that would sell them space, and so on? The fact that their lawyers dropped them, in other words, is their own damn fault and there is zero doubt they can find some other lawyers willing to take them on. But is this true for other aspects of their service? Could they in fact find another option - maybe not the same option, or as optimal an option, but an option - for putting their site online?

Another way of asking this question, since I know next to zero about how large services like this are able to function: is it true that being dropped by three large companies (Amazon, Google, Apple) can effectively shut down such business from any hope of operating? Not operating as they might PREFER, or operating CONVENIENTLY, but operating, PERIOD, in any way that would permit their basic services to exist? I truly do not know. If it's a situation where they just cannot have access to the better services, then yeah, suck it up, private businesses don't have to contract with or provide services to other businesses they think will be a liability or ethical breach. But if you really cannot host any kind of app or social media site without one of those big 3 backers, then it really is an anti-trust situation and it really is a problem that it can be so easily suppressed. Again, clueless here. Please help the clueless.

[Stan]

I think Google and Apple loss only makes it harder for people to get the app version. The killing blow is loss of host. Amazon is the their ISP (one of Amazon's many side businesses). I think they just need to find another host or become their own host. As Amazon doesn't have a monopoly on the internet, they're not totally dead. But they are probably not prepped to go up the internet food chain to host it themselves and it might be hard to find a large enough host.

[poorpete]

I wonder if they have more of an antitrust case than a free speech case. Analogy wise, they were a crowded theater and everyone was shouting "fire" and they were fine with that, and now mad that the town ordered them to close down for renovations.

[WillyGilligan]

I have been assured many times by my libertarian friends that private companies cannot violate my rights because they do not have armies/have the authority to throw me in prison/etc. Let competition solve these minor issues.

[bralbovsky]

This libertarian friend clearly does not have cable, or car insurance.