https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/08/doj-...a-content.html

Why is this important? If the law is struck down then Dan Druff is not shielded near as much. It is pretty much straight against "free speech" forums. Even lesser forums. People can't run them without fear of crazy lawsuits. You could literally go sign up with fake accounts and post shit, then have the owner on the hook for liabity if they are not approving each post. What kind of forum would that be?

At least courts and attorneys are not trying to force youtube/twitter into allowing both sides. I'm pro-Constitution so that bothers me significantly. However, that being said, it does seem that if Youtube is allowed to discriminate against whatever. Whether ignorance, purposeful and manipulative misleading posts, or something pure political - if Youtube can censor then maybe they shouldn't be free of liability.

BUT once that is the case, then they're going to have to crack down on disallowed videos harder than ever, IMO. Simply from liability concerns. Again - hurting free speech.

Thoughts?