Defending Free Speech Is Often A Poor Strategy

Another day, another story about a social media company suspending, blocking, deplatforming- whatever- someone because they allegedly violated terms of service. 

 The standard response to be indignant and sputter about free speech.

 LEE KUAN YEW was in a similar situation as Trump is now. LKY went directly for stronger libel and slander laws to stop the media from constantly dragging him and his administration through the mud.

Now, naturally, those disposed to yell free speech in the first place tend to not be inclined to do such a thing. They like free speech, and tend to be fair- they want their enemies to have the same freedom of speech. 

 But we need to think in terms of what social media is doing now (not to mention the horrible lying the more mainstream media has been doing, but that's more directly answered by LKY's approach). 

When a so-called 'platform' company determines you have violated their terms of service, that company is implying something. Recently Twitter said something about Trump or his campaign spreading misinformation about the coronavirus. This statement, at the very least, implies Trump or his campaign lied.  

There have been other sorts statements companies have made, which, for instance, implies violence. 

And then there's every goofy decision- whether it's banning Alex Jones or shutting down random twitter accounts dedicated to frog memes. 

Every TOS decision is beyond accusatory- it is framed as a statement of fact. And too often, it is not a statement of fact, but rather a lie. Lies must be addressed.

The right tends to ignore the lie and argue the principle of free speech. The lie then becomes part of a background of 'facts'. Those that do not pay close attention may begin to think the lie is true. 

Meanwhile, these organizations continue doing exactly what they are doing, over and over, regardless of the freedom of speech arguments. If, however, each of these decisions by social media companies were a financial hazard- well, they'd either stop quickly or go out of business due to exorbitant legal costs.