How would that work exactly? And are there things that need to be protected in the online world but not the physical/real world?
When it comes to YouTube censorship freedom of speech seems applicable except for the fact that YouTube is a private platform with terms of service you have to agree to for them to host and distribute your content.
At a practical level, once a platform like YouTube becomes The Commons, then certain rights become necessary for us to live in a free society. No idea how you implement that legally though.
Perhaps something like utilities where a company operates at sort of a midpoint between private and public?
One way it could potentially work is for Congress to legislate that large online platforms operate as common carriers and refrain from censoring any legal content. I think this is worth considering. It would create challenges for content moderation but there are ways to deal with that by giving users better tools to filter out objectionable content from their feeds.
> It would create challenges for content moderation
Honestly it sounds like this problem would be gone entirely. The government already defines speech that is so bad as to making it illegal despite the first amendment. Treating social media as a common carrier means they get to skip moderation entirely and just have to follow what is legally allowed.
Forcing social media to act as a common carrier could very well mean algorithmic feeds aren't allowed as they impede speech and still toe the line of censorship. Without algorithmic feeds we could be back to seeing just from those in your circle, meaning moderation shouldn't be nearly as big of a concern anyway.
