Exactly Right: 'You're Not Entitled To A Platform, Boomer.'
from the bingo dept
The Washington Examiner is popular among conservatives, so it's good to see them publish a wonderful article by Hannah Cox completely dismantling the various arguments made by so many Republicans these days, that the government should force websites to carry all speech. In particular, she targets Donald Trump's pathetic lawsuits against Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube with the brilliant title: "You're not entitled to a platform, boomer." Of course, if only it were true that it were just clueless boomers making this argument, but the point stands.
What I like most about the article, though is that it hits on just how incredibly entitled and hypocritical these arguments have been -- completely tossing in the garbage what had been seen as bedrock conservative viewpoints about private property and not playing the victim all the time.
To hear my elders tell it, millennials are entitled.
For as long as I can remember, we’ve been called the participation trophy generation. It’s been said that we’re lazy, we don’t work as hard, and we believe we deserve the best just for showing up. All of that has been debunked pretty thoroughly, by the way, but the narrative persists.
So, pardon my somewhat snide reaction to the latest Trump lawsuit, which is chock-full of the entitlement millennials have been accused of for so long — and from a boomer, no less.
But, then also there's this:
Private companies have a right to censorship; anything less would be a violation of the business owners’ First Amendment rights. The government cannot compel you to say or not say what you wish not to. If Trump were to have his way, this is exactly what the government would be doing. Not only that, it would be telling private business owners they have to host speech by a former (and potentially future) political candidate. There have been many egregious violations of free speech in our history, but none that surpass that in recent memory.
Honestly, the only thing that's missing is highlighting the hysterics that many Republican politicians -- who are now supporting this nonsense -- went into over net neutrality (a much, much, much different situation, that would not, in fact, demand compelled speech, but was simply non-discrimination of traffic flowing over a network). In that case, we heard all about how it would be "the government takeover of the internet" (it was not). And yet, when it comes to these cases (and the various state laws, and Congressional Republican proposals), which would actually be the government forcing websites to host speech they don't want to support, those same voices insist it is necessary (and still whine about the evils of net neutrality).
It's almost as if they never had any real principles at all beyond "what helps me right now."
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: boomers, content moderation, entitlement, personal responsibility, responsibility
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
I forget who said it, but giving kids participation trophies and then mocking them for getting participation trophies is the most Boomer thing ever.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I wonder how many millennials insist their children get "participation trophies".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: participation trophies
actually, checking the data, it was millennials and Gen Y who started the participation trophy thing. yes, mocked by boomers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: participation trophies
...Xers and Millennials weren't handing out trophies to themselves, Merlin.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: participation trophies
Maybe he got confused by personally aging backwards.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: participation trophies
I received participation trophies when I was a kid, and I’m a millennial (one of the younger ones); my mom is a boomer (also on the younger end). It was considered standard by the time I got any. It wasn’t millennials demanding or giving out participation trophies. It was boomers or earlier. Don’t blame the kids for how they were raised.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: participation trophies
Yep. Though I didn't experience that myself, by any logic if you have a problem with way a kid was raised, you have a problem with the person who raised them, not the kid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Yep. If there's a problem with the way a generation was raised... maybe the blame belongs with the people who raised them?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The GQP, the party of it's only bad when YOU do it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cue a bucketload of meaningless drivel...
You there Koby?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The article title is rife with alternative meanings.
It could be a reference to the Donald, who is a boomer and is launching a cry-baby snowflake lawsuit.
Apparently, some now use "boomer" as slang for something like "idiot".
Yes, it could be a generic insult tossed at all of the boomer generation.
Or only those boomers who are genuinely idiots.
Personally, although a late(ish) boomer, I've always found the slurs thrown at millenials to be rather offensive. They expect rapid promotion in their jobs? Well, what exactly have companies been offering to attract younger workers? I heard of a thirty year old whose mother went into work with him to complain about a review. Is the thirty year old the problem? Or the mother? I'm sure my parents would have been very supportive, but no way they would have confronted my manager (or my teachers before that).
The sad thing is that millenials are now being insulted by their children as well (as always happens). A true sandwich generation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The article title is rife with alternative meanings.
As a millennial I can say I've never experienced my Mother doing that. I can also say that if it ever had happened (and I found out about it), I'd make sure it never happened again.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The article title is rife with alternative meanings.
Helicopter parents have always been a thing, its just been turned up a notch.
It is one thing to want your child to have everything you never did, it is another to demand the world give it without any effort.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The article title is rife with alternative meanings.
My mom's a Boomer and she doesn't take offense. If anything, her politics put her more in common with Millennials than Baby Boomers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The article title is rife with alternative meanings.
It's not so much that millennials expect rapid promotions in their jobs. It's that there's always half a dozen voices around them screaming that they're not accomplished enough, that they're not trying their best, and even if they are their "best" is insufficient. Millennials are trained to be FOMO machines - if their parents don't freak them the fuck out, they'll gladly do it to each other. Look up the Chinese phenomenon of "nei juan" or "involution" and you'll see that this problem isn't unique to Western countries.
This is, of course, also ignoring the fact that the "opportunities" boomers keep insisting that millennials have access to have simply not kept up with the times, or an increasing pool of competitors. Companies, by and large, are completely happy with keeping the status quo and using employees as corporate soldiers to be sent into war and replaced. Governments and schools are incentivized to churn out graduates that are little more than mindless drones to be shaped according to corporate will. Which was all fine and dandy during the mid-late 20th century when manufacturing was still a primary driver of developed economies, then buzzwords like "creative problem solving" and "knowledge-based economy" started becoming vogue. Then every business, school and parent instantly got buyer's regret, angry that their kids aren't happy enough, aren't imaginative enough.
When you get penalized, insulted, reprimanded for literally following orders, it is incredibly dehumanizing. And the kids are fighting back - whether it's the "tang ping" revolution in China or the "fuck it expenses" in South Korea, or the general sentiment that the college experience isn't worth it in the US.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Perfection?
What is this single idea that Corps have to do what we say?
For all the bad words being thrown about, communism and socialism, Isnt this one of the Fundamentals?
It used to be that corps listened, but still did things THEIR WAY. But we are also the ones that States and Fed, kept giving Tax benefits away to them. WOW, move your company over here, and hire a couple hundred people, we wont tax you for 10-20 years.
LOVE that BS, and when the time is up the company MOVED.
Ever wonder why SOME international corps Moved to the USA? The Profit margins are HUGE. In their own countries, I think that have the same problems as OURS DID.
Iv had discussions with people who like trump, and the idea of moving the companies BACK to the USA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A couple of Koby-adjacent nit-picks
... to moderate
True, but wasn't Koby getting lectured that the argument about association, rather than speech in the case of moderation?
While these aren't critical to the message, it pays to be precise when laying out your case.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: A couple of Koby-adjacent nit-picks
Not only precise, but accurate as well. There is a difference between the two words.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
These platforms made themselves Public. As such they should be open to all, free speech. Instead, they ban Trump and over their own LIES. While letting the left get away with lies, lies, lies, and worse and all that is OK because it's their own side. These platforms have made themselves into the Public Square.
By the way, In CA, and I think a few other states, Private MALLS are considered free speech areas. They don't like it and will try to boot you anyway, but in reality, it's free speech, and people are allowed to be there and exercise that right!!!
PruneYard Shopping Center v. Robins, 447 U.S. 74 (1980)
https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/583/pruneyard-shopping-center-v-robins
So if you think Trump has no case, you're sadly mistaken. Of course, if you even see the message, it would be pretty slim as this is a leftist site also throwing out lies as facts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Naw.
I briefly considered arguing why (US politics aside) I think you're Exactly Wrong, but then it all kinda devolved into too much edgelording right there in the title. You do you, Zoomer...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Naw.
ok boomer
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Naw.
"I think you're Exactly Wrong"
But, too lazy to explain why.
"You do you, Zoomer"
Also too lazy to look at how old the author is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
'Self-entitlement is bad!... for other people.'
'Look at all those kids with their senses of entitlement, how pathetic they are for thinking they are owed things! Now if you'll excuse me I'm going to go back to frothing at the mouth about how I'm owed a place on the social media platform of my choice and owed a shield from any consequences for my words and actions.'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
EVEN IF were right, We The People can make it SO!
Needs only for large number of "natural" persons to stand up for THEIR Rights, not the alleged ones of legal fictions called corporations.
And WE who expect simple fairness are still the majority, ya know.
Otherwise, we'd still be serfs under English tyrants, ya know. -- Maz sees himself as religious supremacist Royalty, not coincidentally.
Are corporations "entitled" to discriminate against viewpoints?
OF COURSE NOT. That's why they DODGE with false claims that justify censorship.
PROOF of how fragile are Maz's notions is that he cannot let the least dissent in. I been tryin', for a record number of clicks!
The result of believing this line be the END of conservatives!
The writer is just another of the many bought-off / born-rich corporatists betraying bedrock conservatives.
It's not a "platform", but mere HOSTING of a web-site!
Is it too much for We The People to demand corporations (which we permit and control through thousands of laws, by the way) to act fairly in this way? See the "lunch counter" decisions. SAME principle, a business arbitrarily refusing service.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: you’re still wrong
Oh hey blueballs finally made it past the spam filter. Enjoy my “moderation” vote.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: EVEN IF were right, We The People can make it SO!
While I do think that corporations really shouldn't be treated as people for constitutional purposes, even if you undo that terrible ruling you are still stuck. You see, corporations are owned by shareholders who are either real people or some other organization that is ultimately owned by real people. So forcing a corporation to publish something is eventually forcing real people to do so, and they have constitutional protection against precisely that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: EVEN IF were right, We The People can make it SO!
Shareholders can sell their stocks in a corporation that they find objectionable. I follow an investing blog and often see investors whining about Disney or CNN and how "woke" they are and how they're selling and getting out. Good. Sell your shares for no good (profit-driven) reason so the price will tank and I'll snap some up on the cheap.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: EVEN IF were right, We The People can make it SO!
"Is it too much for We The People to demand corporations (which we permit and control through thousands of laws, by the way) to act fairly in this way?"
As long as you aren't living in a marxist dictatorship? Yes.
Because until that happens your argument that property owners should not be allowed to dictate who is and who is not welcome on their property isn't going anywhere.
You'd probably be happier in the old soviet union or China than living in the US, I think. Too bad for you China isn't likely to accept badly educated armchair marxists as immigrants.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Show where corporations / business are "entitled" to ANYTHING.
YOU CAN'T because NOT, they're FICTIONS.
I am alone racking up TONS of apparent page views for TD, yet get no thanks! You ungrateful thieves.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Show where corporations / business are "entitled"
AND I'm IN!
OKAY. I've spent a while confirming TD is locked down!
At least on Maz's last. -- Oh, here too, after several attempts...
IF anyone were to admit they see how many I put in the alleged "Moderation" queue which is nothing but a bit bucket, it'd HELP, thanks.
What I get sez:
Free Speech [ HA! Only if agree!]
Comment Held for Moderation...
Thanks for your comment.
It will be reviewed by our staff before it is posted.
Only you hard-core neo-liberals can put the LIE of "Free Speech" right above another LIE of comment "moderated"!
Tactic I'm trying to overcome your faulty comment system, which appears contrary to your promises of "Free speech" and "comment open to all" is four windows open at once, and repeating. You should really fix this lousy system, 'cause looks exactly like viewpoint discrimination.
And today, seems that LONGER comments are let in! This is my game now, kids, trying to find a way to just USE your lousy system that you offer of own free will, with NO visible reservation, therefore it's viewpoint discrimination.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Show where corporations / business are "entitled"
AND I'm IN!
NOW let's see if Techdirt withers and dies, or goes on without being affected by a little bit of on-topic text. SHEESH.
Tell ya, Maz, I can provide evidence to Congress for either party that will get this stupid assertion that corporations are now our rulers changed!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Show where corporations / business are "entitled&qu
Want to stop being treated as a Spammer? Here's how:
Thank you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Show where corporations / business are "entitled"
The result of believing this line be the END of conservatives!
The writer is just another of the many bought-off / born-rich corporatists betraying bedrock conservatives.
It's not a "platform", but mere HOSTING of a web-site!
Is it too much for We The People to demand corporations (which we permit and control through thousands of laws, by the way) to act fairly in this way? See the "lunch counter" decisions. SAME principle, a business arbitrarily refusing service.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"You're not entitled to a phone or emergency services, boomer!"
That's what the article is saying.
Tell me, what's the fundamental difference between Facebook, Twitter or ISPs banning people and making them disappear online and the government doing it?
And don't give me "muh private platform". Tell me the real difference between them. Because from where I'm standing, it's no different.
Also, the White House is flagging Facebook and Twitter posts and having those companies remove those posts, so the argument of "muh private platform" flies out the window.
But I know, you're all going to downvote this, because you know you're wrong.
BTW, Masnick, how much are you getting paid from Google again? Google got sued back in 2012 and had to reveal who their shills are.
Your name is on that list.
https://musictechpolicy.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/google-shill-list-2.pdf
https://archive.ph /Fiz0n - Archive link to Copia.
Google, of course, stands to benefit from controlling the Public Square via Google and Youtube like Facebook and Twitter do.
BTW, even Zuckerburg admits "yeah, conservatives don't speak up about their political views in our offices" and Tim Pool, a moderate liberal, grilled Jack Dorsey hard on the leftist bias Twitter has.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "You're not entitled to a phone or emergency services, boome
Becaiae that lie only appears in demented hallucinations, nowhere in the real world.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "You're not entitled to a phone or emergency services, boome
The US Constitution doesn't prohibit "Facebook, Twitter, or ISPs" from banning people. Quite the opposite, in fact: it prohibits Congress from making any law that "abridges the freedom of the people to peaceably assemble", and if Facebook and Twitter don't want to assemble with people they don't want to, the US Government can't compel them to do so.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "You're not entitled to a phone or emergency services, boome
"Facebook, Twitter or ISPs banning people and making them disappear online"
For the first two, that's not a thing they can possibly do. The third is something that's a concern, but you constantly support their ability to do so if a person accidentally downloads an MP3 file.
" Tell me the real difference between them."
One's the government and the others aren't. This isn't hard.
"BTW, even Zuckerburg admits "yeah, conservatives don't speak up about their political views in our offices""
I'd have a look at less outdated information about Facebook's policies regarding conservatives, as they do undermine your premise somewhat.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
not really a surprise...
The 'new' Trump Republican party has taken stands that are opposite traditional conservative positions on a lot of things, not just this 'Free Speech' invented controversy. They aren't real strong on 'free markets' where international trade comes in. They don't seem to see much need for the rule of law, and the only thing they care about in "law and order" is the 'order'.
But the thing I have to wonder is how much longer Ms. Cox will be welcome at the Washington Examiner... it's not that she'll be "canceled", oh no! But they probably won't publish another word by her. Remember, 'cancel culture' is another "leftist" thing, Trump Republicans don't do that - just ask Liz Cheney.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I miss the old Republicans
Whatever happened to the pro-business, pro-freedom Republicans who wouldn't dream of meddling in a corporation's policies, trusting in the invisible hand of yadda yadda to make everything right? This weird new Republican party using the government to harass and hamstring business is just bizarre and i gotta wonder, what's the point? We have the Dems to corral big business, don't we?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I miss the old Republicans
Judging by how well these compelled-speech lawsuits have gone, I'd say a lot of them became judges.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I miss the old Republicans
They’ve been slowly and consistently trading having beliefs for power.
When the choice is either be consistent with our espoused beliefs or garner a mild political advantage, they’ve chosen momentary power every damn time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I miss the old Republicans
Whatever happened to the pro-business, pro-freedom Republicans who wouldn't dream of meddling in a corporation's policies, trusting in the invisible hand of yadda yadda to make everything right?
They were faced with a free market and resulting business decisions that didn't favor them and theirs, and decided that if the free market wasn't going to lean their way it needed a (not so little) nudge?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I miss the old Republicans
"Whatever happened to the pro-business, pro-freedom Republicans..."
Failed to pass on their politics and died or are currently center-right Democrats?
The current party division of the US is this; The insane, malicious, bigoted, fanatical and hypocritical end up with the GOP. Most of the people not fitting those criteria end up with the Democrats.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Astonishment
Never ceases to amaze me how, it it's conservative expression, Tech Dirt is all-in for censorship. It would be hilarious if it wasn't so short-sighted and mean-spirited.
Now Tech Dirt takes it to another level with Boomer Bashing.
But take heart. There's still a lot of room for putting down every other group who has a different point of view than the standard Williamsburg aging Gen-X'er.
I'm sure when the censors start censoring you it will be a surprise, but I've been surprised for a few years now that Tech Dijrt can't stick to copyright and patent nonsense, broadband monopolies, and a few other topics that they know something about. It's a surprise, the mission creep.
Oh well. Decay and fall.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Astonishment
Oh, the dishonest turd-dropper is back. Flag & ignore.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Astonishment
I think what Restless90125 is is best described in German: Lügendummkopf (I'm sure Scary Devil Monastery would have a better word to describe him).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Astonishment
"(I'm sure Scary Devil Monastery would have a better word to describe him)".
How about Sturmabteilung?
Lügender Dummkopf would imply he's unaware of what he's saying. And it's pretty clear that's not the case, looking at a few of the lines he's put out whenever the topic was non-caucasians, freedom of speech, or fascism. In english the word would be brownshirt.
Restless94110 shares more than a few criteria with the firebrand polemics of Julius Streicher and certainly hasn't been shy about his opinions. He's more or less given the game away in his use of the old nazi proverb for free media - lügenpresse - which outside of white power and nazi forums in the US is usually applied in the translated form of "Fake news" by alt-righters not too keen on giving away where that convenient deflection tactic first came from.
When the GOP bullhorns were dogwhistling a message of blood and soil from on top of a speaker's podium shaped like a winged odal in that CPAC hosting the golden Trump idol...they were trying to reach people like Restless94110 and Shel10.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Astonishment
[addendum]
That said it's doing the original nazis a disservice to compare them with the spineless snowflakes of the current US knockoff. The original nazis weren't so shit-scared of public condemnation they'd keep quiet about where they were coming from. And this quality of abject cowardice a serendipitous reason as to why the US alt-right is unable to serve as anything other than mindless vote fodder for hypocritical dog-whistlers in the GOP; It's hard to mount a credible uprising if exposure makes you melt worse than Giuliani under pressroom lights.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Astonishment
When Americans take their country back, Techdirt and Hannah Cox and Dorsey and Zuckerberg and other anti-American types will be the first to beg for forgiveness and mercy when they are about to get their just desserts. But they’ll have pushed Americans too far by then; they’ll have pushed so far that Americans, for the sake of their descendants, will realize mercy is a luxury we can ill afford.
The cries for mercy will fall on hardened ears, and they will be handled with the absolute ruthlessness they richly deserve.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Astonishment
Amazing what kind of nut-cases there are, no wonder the FBI is tracking people like you, the domestic terrorist wannabe.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nobody has held Public Education to a standard of teaching how to learn. Instead the system was bounced from political experiments to finally land in what you see now. We invited the folks in way back in 1930's because they were on a list of worst troublemakers ever, hang them was pre WWII axis solution.
Now look at the state of all education, nothing but socialist dogma.
Rant over but Campaign Finance Reform is a dead horse.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
As usual, I read your post and all I come away with is "What the fuck are they jabbering about?"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Seems to be a word salad of right wing talking points having been dragged through Google translate a few times then assembled out of order.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]