> But the issue with these laws was whether or not it constricted the platforms’ ability to express themselves in the way in which they moderated. That is, the editorial decisions that were being made expressing “this is what type of community we enable” are a form of public expression that the Florida & Texas laws seek to stifle.
This is taking the platforms' arguments as true, when it doesn't need to. Regardless of whether moderation is "speech", it's something Congress wanted them to do, because the alternative is that they don't in order to avoid liability and then everything is full of spam.
And "corporate moderation is protected speech" seems like a bad precedent. Even if you like it when it's Facebook, what happens when it's Comcast?
This is taking the platforms' arguments as true, when it doesn't need to. Regardless of whether moderation is "speech", it's something Congress wanted them to do, because the alternative is that they don't in order to avoid liability and then everything is full of spam.
And "corporate moderation is protected speech" seems like a bad precedent. Even if you like it when it's Facebook, what happens when it's Comcast?