That's hand wavy, and definitely not a solid case for "had to."
And what regulatory pressure? The US Government has no business dealing with trolls. First Amendment.
This and other moves to get around limitations on regulating speech by using private agents is not going to do any real good, and will do considerable harm.
Valid, many would argue necessary, dissent is being suppressed in the same fashion, and all that happens to coincide with very high levels of government disapproval.
Anyone trying to make the case massive dislikes aimed at major news networks, POTUS and others has to also explain how doing that is not actually suppressing meaningful and justifiable disapproval. Hard case to make.
And what regulatory pressure? The US Government has no business dealing with trolls. First Amendment.
This and other moves to get around limitations on regulating speech by using private agents is not going to do any real good, and will do considerable harm.
Valid, many would argue necessary, dissent is being suppressed in the same fashion, and all that happens to coincide with very high levels of government disapproval.
Anyone trying to make the case massive dislikes aimed at major news networks, POTUS and others has to also explain how doing that is not actually suppressing meaningful and justifiable disapproval. Hard case to make.
Funny how that all works isn't it?
Got anything else?