![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
A lot of political pundits are being banned from Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, and other social media sites these days, for violation of the Terms of Service. Here's why that isn't censorship in the First Amendment sense:
1. Social media sites are PRIVATELY-OWNED. When you sign up for an account, you have to agree to the Terms of Service. The ToS is a LEGALLY-BINDING CONTRACT. It says that you're allowed to post content on the site, but ONLY so long as you follow the ToS. Violate the ToS, and the company that runs that website no longer has any obligation whatsoever to let you use their private property.
2. There are other websites out there. Blogger, Wordpress, Vimeo, etc. also allow people to upload content onto their privately-owned websites. This is subject to those websites' ToS, as listed in point #1.
3. The First Amendment only prevents THE GOVERNMENT, ITSELF, from silencing people. If you are not being thrown in jail for expressing your opinions, then your 1st Amendment rights are still 100% intact. See also: the difference between the government and a private corporation like Facebook.
4. This is the Internet we're talking about here. If expressing opinions that the ToS of social-media sites tend to ban is that important to you, then for a small fee, you can buy a web domain, create your own personal website, and upload all the text, photos, Flash games, and videos to that website that you want. This is, in fact, how people used to do things before those big social-media sites came along. We had things like webrings to help people find other websites dedicated to the same sort of stuff as your website.
For example: Alex Jones was taken off a lot of social-media sites, not out of bias, but because he violated those websites' Terms of Service. However, the InfoWars website that Mr. Jones runs still exists in all its rage-filled, er, glory. The government has done nothing to silence Alex Jones. Searching for "info wars" on Google shows Jones's website as the first search result.
1. Social media sites are PRIVATELY-OWNED. When you sign up for an account, you have to agree to the Terms of Service. The ToS is a LEGALLY-BINDING CONTRACT. It says that you're allowed to post content on the site, but ONLY so long as you follow the ToS. Violate the ToS, and the company that runs that website no longer has any obligation whatsoever to let you use their private property.
2. There are other websites out there. Blogger, Wordpress, Vimeo, etc. also allow people to upload content onto their privately-owned websites. This is subject to those websites' ToS, as listed in point #1.
3. The First Amendment only prevents THE GOVERNMENT, ITSELF, from silencing people. If you are not being thrown in jail for expressing your opinions, then your 1st Amendment rights are still 100% intact. See also: the difference between the government and a private corporation like Facebook.
4. This is the Internet we're talking about here. If expressing opinions that the ToS of social-media sites tend to ban is that important to you, then for a small fee, you can buy a web domain, create your own personal website, and upload all the text, photos, Flash games, and videos to that website that you want. This is, in fact, how people used to do things before those big social-media sites came along. We had things like webrings to help people find other websites dedicated to the same sort of stuff as your website.
For example: Alex Jones was taken off a lot of social-media sites, not out of bias, but because he violated those websites' Terms of Service. However, the InfoWars website that Mr. Jones runs still exists in all its rage-filled, er, glory. The government has done nothing to silence Alex Jones. Searching for "info wars" on Google shows Jones's website as the first search result.
