“The First Amendment does not permit a public official who utilizes a social media account for all manner of official purposes to exclude persons from an otherwise-open online dialog because they expressed views with which the official disagrees,” Circuit Judge Barrington Parker wrote. Huffigton Post
Il problema è un altro.
I social bandivano l'hate speech. Ma con i potenti sono tolleranti.
Nonostante questo Trump ha aperto un tavolo sui social per controllarli, senza invitare Twitter nè Facebook.
Ne vedremo delle belle, si fa per dire.
Ma è ovvio: controllare un potere così grande, è indispensabile per chi ha il potere.
United States Court of Appeals
For the Second Circuit
Case 18-1691, Document 141-1, 07/09/2019, 2602829,
"The irony in all of this is that we write at a time in the history of this nation 6
when the conduct of our government and its officials is subject to wide‐open, 7
robust debate. This debate encompasses an extraordinarily broad range of ideas 8
and viewpoints and generates a level of passion and intensity the likes of which 9
have rarely been seen. This debate, as uncomfortable and as unpleasant as it 10
frequently may be, is nonetheless a good thing. In resolving this appeal, we 11
remind the litigants and the public that if the First Amendment means anything, 12
it means that the best response to disfavored speech on matters of public concern 13
is more speech, not less. "