Slashdot Mirror


Online "Public" Spaces Don't Guarantee Rights

mikesd81 recommends an AP piece covering a lot of examples of the ways free speech and other rights don't exist on the private Web. One case featured was that of Dutch photographer Maarten Dors, who had this picture deleted by flickr. Without prior notice, Yahoo deleted the photo on grounds it violated an unwritten ban on depicting children smoking. While Dors eventually got the photo restored, after the second time it was deleted, the case highlights the consequence of having online commons controlled by private corporations. "Rules aren't always clear, enforcement is inconsistent, and users can find content removed or accounts terminated without a hearing. Appeals are solely at the service provider's discretion. Users get caught in the crossfire as hundreds of individual service representatives apply their own interpretations of corporate policies, sometimes imposing personal agendas or misreading guidelines. First Amendment protections generally do not extend to private property in the physical world, allowing a shopping mall to legally kick out a customer wearing a T-shirt with a picture of a smoking child." Reason.com has some more analysis on the issues brought up by the AP story.

4 of 347 comments (clear)

  1. If you want a job done right, by Mesa+MIke · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...you gotta do it yourself, (and host it on your own servers)

  2. No Shit? by clifyt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Next you know, someone is going to tell me I can't have free speech in someone else's home!

    If I can't go into random people's houses, and in privately owned property and say what I want, you are oppressing me!!!

    1. Re:No Shit? by CowboyNealOption · · Score: 5, Funny

      1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500 Just hop the fence and come right in.

  3. Re:Cue the Reaganites.. by dgatwood · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Agreed. In a truly free market, most submarkets would quickly devolve into monopolies that would then abuse their monopoly power to ensure that no newcomers could enter the market either by flooding the market with goods at a loss until the newcomer went bankrupt or by using extra money to exhaust crucial resources from the newcomers' suppliers, ensuring that they could not obtain enough of those resources to meet demands. This, of course, assumes that there are still laws preventing what would be the obvious tools of a truly free market---knocking off their competition (assassinations), burning down their competitor's corporate headquarters/manufacturing facilities, stealing their competitor's physical assets, bribing banks/bankers to not give loans to their competitor, threatening businesses that distribute the competitor's product with pulling all of their most popular products (including products their competitor does not make) if the distributors don't drop all of their competitor's products, etc.

    The promise of a free market as the solution to the world's ills is a fanciful notion that fools many who have never experienced anything resembling a free market. Those who have experienced it, however, immediately see right through such foolishness. Entrenched monopolies are hard to get rid of even with controls on monopolies. Without those controls, they become unstoppable rather rapidly.

    --

    Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.