@Pluto's Republic Hate speech, slander, and false advertising are all forms of speech that are regulated by law. What I am referring to is content is not against the law, but may be purged simply because it does not meet a corporate agenda or personal standard.

For example, the almost complete black out of Bernie Sanders' candidacy because the MSM was supporting Hillary Clinton. Or as another example, Florida governor Rick Scott's ban on the use of the words "climate change" and "global warming" in any state document, presentation, or correspondence because he is an climate change denier. These types of bans may be offensive to some because of their own personal agendas, but they should not be prohibited simply for those reasons.

Hi #6.1

In many countries, certain types of damaging speech or hate speech is criminalized. Some criminalize deliberate lies meant to misinform the public about important civic or policy issues. Others criminalize harm caused slander. We knew it was coming post-Snowden, but Europe has finally laid down the law on Americans doing business there.

This news story may interest you.

Americans are known for their acute thinking and piercing logic skills, so censorship is something we will never have to worry about. They know how to sift out the lies and misinformation from the media cacophony, and make wise choices for the future of the democracy. This level-headedness is apparent everywhere you look. No ethical or civic limits on speech are required. /snark

@Pluto's Republic in Germany. First they filter out political opinions they don't like, whether criminal or not. Now they have to eliminate lies--which means that in Germany, at least, there will almost no news about American politics.

Hi #6.1

In many countries, certain types of damaging speech or hate speech is criminalized. Some criminalize deliberate lies meant to misinform the public about important civic or policy issues. Others criminalize harm caused slander. We knew it was coming post-Snowden, but Europe has finally laid down the law on Americans doing business there.

This news story may interest you.

Americans are known for their acute thinking and piercing logic skills, so censorship is something we will never have to worry about. They know how to sift out the lies and misinformation from the media cacophony, and make wise choices for the future of the democracy. This level-headedness is apparent everywhere you look. No ethical or civic limits on speech are required. /snark

@mimi @mimi I read things way too literally. My apologies, mimi.

I am very opposed to all the intrusiveness that our government places upon people's rights including those of foreign visitors. None of it makes us safer, just oppressed by our government.

Just the other day, my husband and I received a questionnaire from the Census Bureau called the American Community Survey. It said we were chosen at random and were required to answer all the questions under penalty of law. The census surveys are very intrusive, but this American Community Survey was even more intrusive including personal health questions. We filled it out but I felt very violated by my own government for requiring me to answer questions that I feel are not their business.

So I am very touchy about issues of personal freedom and the ways that our government is incrementally inserting itself into every aspect of our lives. I apologize for not seeing the snark in your comment.

#6.1
on purpose. I have a twitter account and use it sometimes to follow those I follow, which are 163 people. hmm. I read it may be every three days or so. I seldom retwitter other people's twitters or click on twitter for articles I find worth otherwise to support. I just don't like to express my support for an article via a click on the twitter icon.

My comment was to be taken as a sarkastic, snarkalistic response to AL's essay, which I read first thing after waking up, which means that I react badly, ie half asleep and mad to read "off the rocker people's news tweets". First thing in the morning and then such "stuff". nah, nah.

Honestly I don't think I am guilty of free speeck oppression or not knowing what is free speech and what is hate speech and what is abusive usage of free speech tools. I am so sorry that I couldn't cross over to you as a reasonable person with regards to free speech rights in the appropriate manner.

But there is no doubt in my mind that twitter is a tool people can be addicted to and abuse, like any other social medial sites in which you can converse with other people, freely and uncensored.

Pluto posted an excellent link to clarify the US versus German point of views vis a vis freedom of speech rights on social media. Can't add anything to that other than that I tend do understand and trust those arguments more than the absolute freedom of speech defenders' pov. It's a matter of trust. And I don't trust people not abusing other people by letting themselves go verbally into the pig mud pool.

There is another thing I am opposed to. People who enter the US these days have to reveal their social media account's passwords. Aside from the fact that I don't know my twitter account's password by heart as well as other accounts I have, I really think one should think about who is hypocritical here with "freedom of speech and privacy rights" of social media accounts, me or TPTB in the US.

And in case Al really asked us seriously if Trump if off his rocker. I would say at least at 4 am in the morning typing tweets he is, if it's him who types them.

@mimi
people have vis a vis the actions the Custom and Border Patrol people seizing and searching your electronic devices and cell phones.
Can Customs and Border Officials Search Your Phone? These Are Your Rights - Posted on Mar 15, 2017 - By Patrick G. Lee / ProPublica

#6.1
on purpose. I have a twitter account and use it sometimes to follow those I follow, which are 163 people. hmm. I read it may be every three days or so. I seldom retwitter other people's twitters or click on twitter for articles I find worth otherwise to support. I just don't like to express my support for an article via a click on the twitter icon.

My comment was to be taken as a sarkastic, snarkalistic response to AL's essay, which I read first thing after waking up, which means that I react badly, ie half asleep and mad to read "off the rocker people's news tweets". First thing in the morning and then such "stuff". nah, nah.

Honestly I don't think I am guilty of free speeck oppression or not knowing what is free speech and what is hate speech and what is abusive usage of free speech tools. I am so sorry that I couldn't cross over to you as a reasonable person with regards to free speech rights in the appropriate manner.

But there is no doubt in my mind that twitter is a tool people can be addicted to and abuse, like any other social medial sites in which you can converse with other people, freely and uncensored.

Pluto posted an excellent link to clarify the US versus German point of views vis a vis freedom of speech rights on social media. Can't add anything to that other than that I tend do understand and trust those arguments more than the absolute freedom of speech defenders' pov. It's a matter of trust. And I don't trust people not abusing other people by letting themselves go verbally into the pig mud pool.

There is another thing I am opposed to. People who enter the US these days have to reveal their social media account's passwords. Aside from the fact that I don't know my twitter account's password by heart as well as other accounts I have, I really think one should think about who is hypocritical here with "freedom of speech and privacy rights" of social media accounts, me or TPTB in the US.

And in case Al really asked us seriously if Trump if off his rocker. I would say at least at 4 am in the morning typing tweets he is, if it's him who types them.