Kialo requires cookies to work correctly.
Free Speech on the Internet: Should Internet Companies Deny Service to White Supremacists?
Internet companies are wrong in denying services to white supremacists.
The information posted online by white supremacists can be used for counterterrorism operations against groups that are deemed a threat, or to investigate crimes.
Such a move is morally inconsistent as long as it is only applied to white supremacists.
White supremacists, like followers of any other political ideology, deserve to have their voices heard.
Censoring any view from the market place of ideas limits public debate and thus undermines the democratic process.
Internet companies are the wrong actors to decide which speech should be censored.
These actions violate the right to freedom of speech of those whose content is removed.
Denying service to white supremacists might lead to extensive online censorship of non-mainstream views.
Facebook and Twitter are legally obliged to delete accounts affiliated with terrorism.
Certain ideas are fundamentally undemocratic and must be censored to protect a democracy.
White supremacists threaten and endanger a variety of ethnic, religious and other societal groups whose members live all across the world.
Since they own their platforms, Internet companies have the right to decide who gets to publish on them, and who does not.
It is in the interest of Internet companies to deny services to white supremacists.
Should Businesses Deny Service to Trump Administration Officials?
Should businesses be allowed to deny service to anyone?
Should Governments Ever Limit Free Speech?