Objectification, hate, rape threats: the politicians debating online abuse mean well, but to truly understand, they need to see what I see

  • artyom@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    My argument is that it’s illegal for the govt to regulate such speech.

    What kind of accountability were you referring to? Were you expecting tech billionaires to hold themselves accountable?

    • Tim@lemmy.snowgoons.ro
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      The article is from a UK newspaper. What is and isn’t legal for them to regulate is decided by their Parliament and nobody else. No Kings, and all that.

      Meanwhile, you should know that the “free speech” lectures are getting pretty old from the country that checks social media history at the border to make sure you didn’t say anything bad about the Dear Leader, which shuts down TV shows it doesn’t like, and generally ensures the media toes the party line.

      (See also - lectures on why kids shooting up schools is a necessary price to pay for that well regulated militia that will be along to save you from tyrants, well, real soon now…)

      • artyom@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        33 minutes ago

        from the country that checks social media history at the border to make sure you didn’t say anything bad about the Dear Leader

        That’s also illegal. A rational person would argue to prevent that. An irrational person would suggest that it means we should move deeper into anarchy.

    • SaltySalamander@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Go yell “fire” in a crowded theater, or “i have a bomb” on an airplane and see just how quickly the government regulates your speech.