"pure"

I dont think we have had a "pure" free market anywhere

sometimes this has worked out well, and othertimes badly

but I think it is naive to believe that a pure free market can realistically exist. (a lovely ideal, but not realistic)

@Tom_Servo I dont think there is an example of a pure free market (Not on a big scale anyway)

Facebook funds political parties. The fact that the state allows this is what starts making things complicated. This obviously affects Facebook's political influence later on. And this is an example something simple being turned into something complicated.

@Jerm so facebook shouldnt have the freedom to have a political view

?

how dare you limit the market this way 😬

They should have the freedom to a political view, but I think they should then be outspoken about it

I am being faecitious

Well, Facebook is just a group of individuals, so obviously they have their own interests. They should fund out of their own, rather than on behalf of Facebook.

but if shareholders dont agree with how they spend money politically they could disinvest

or use gab

are you even slightly seeing my point here?

nothing exists in a vacuum

theory is just theory and reality is sometimes messier

doesnt mean we should throw the theory out though

I see your point, but it's not very strong. You're not happy with FB's size and want them to be more regulated by the state, but can't clarify exactly what your criteria is.

Again it comes down to choices and our little negotiations in our heads , do I use Facebook or Gab? Facebook gives me reach, but Gab gives me political freedom... We make these choices as individuals and most prefer reach to political freedom for some strange reason

@Jerm nope cathy newman... I am concerned about the power Facebook has over free speech and am not convinced that free market theory will address this adequately

@Tom_Servo FB only has influence over free speech on its own platform.

@Jerm sorry unneccessarily rude - being said with a smile on my face

Also, free speech does not exist.

That's the first problem with the arguments around free speech.

People need to define it.

You aren't allowed to speak smack about my fiance in my home. Therefore, your free speech is curtailed.

You can't shout "bomb!" in a place. No free speech there either.

plane*

A business newspaper won't publish my cartoons about sports. No free speech there either.

if a printer refused to print your newspaper despite your willingness to pay then this would be comparable

A printer doesn't have to print your newspaper.

your house is not vital to public discourse

so no problem

It's not your right to get their business.

@Jerm, I agree, you will chase someone out your home and that is your right, but you should not be able to fine/arrest someone for offending your fiance

if printers had their own TOS, and refused to publish the Rapport because they were carrying one of your cartoons

Let them.

Like I said, it's not your right to get somebody's business.

back to work for me....

As a matter of interest, when last have you changed your mind on an issue?

any issue