>Facebook has taken on the role of managing the distribution of information to billions of people. It handles communications between groups and individuals. Given how critical those activities are to a healthy, liberal, free society, we should take steps to protect the rights and duties of individual users and platforms. Maybe we'll coalesce into a roughly cooperative country sometime in the future an accomplish that.
Facebook has specifically designated itself as a platform, not a content provider. IF what you are saying is true, we need to remove Section 230 protection and force Facebook to be accountable for all of its content.
Personally I think there are countless alternatives to Facebook and trying to nationalize into a utility, or regulate it with an agency will only serve to foment authoritarianism.
First of all, Facebook is not a utility. No matter what you think, it is literally not classified a utility at this time.
Second, just because governments, companies, or people choose to use it to communicate, does not mean it is a utility. There is a choice and many, many alternatives to Facebook. Utility status is reserved for things like power water and gas, (even internet in many places), as there are physical barriers to choice.
Third, it is not unconstitutional for utilities to ban customers in the United States.
Basically every Fortune 500 company is guilty of this. Most corporations loyalties go Shareholders, Employees, Government, Customers in that order. It is more shocking to me that anyone is surprised Facebook puts profit over people. I would be surprised if they *Didn't* do that.
Should we ban all telecoms too? I mean people used phones on networks to commit genocide as well. While we're at it, we should ban iPhones as well because they used them to communicate. What a stupid argument.
This is a TERRIBLE idea. Turning Facebook into a government entity, (or even making an org to regulate it), is as anti-American as it is unconstitutional. Take away 230 protection status and if the company survives great, otherwise another one will take its place.
I don't care what you say, any person CAN live without Facebook. Yes it might be painful for some, but in a free market society, some company (most likely many disparate companies), will cover those needs.
Facebook has specifically designated itself as a platform, not a content provider. IF what you are saying is true, we need to remove Section 230 protection and force Facebook to be accountable for all of its content.
Personally I think there are countless alternatives to Facebook and trying to nationalize into a utility, or regulate it with an agency will only serve to foment authoritarianism.