For me I would hold the social media companies more to account when it comes to hate speech and harassment online and force social media companies to do more to stop online harassment and hate speech.

  • Dyskolos@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Just for the sake of the argument, I’m assuming we (here) actually have a problem with shooters/terrorists (we don’t): So because a fraction of people abuse something makes it valid to punish everyone else too? Is this some “think of the kids!!!”-argument? Surely someone could be radicalized because he COULD. But also there could someone having the opportunity to speak at all. Like a woman in oh-so-many-countries on this stupid planet.

    The negative consequences of free speech don’t warrant the necessity of banning it alltogether. And if we do, who sets the rules? Who draws the line? And do you think the same when the line might be drawn before YOUR opinion? How’d you think about that then? Or are YOU privileged enough to not have to worry about it?

    • phillaholic@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m going to stop you at we don’t have a problem with terrorists. Shit take, I don’t care to continue.

      • Dyskolos@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Who is “we”? Where I live we don’t have such things. At least not in a noteworthy quantity. Not everyone is us-american :)