Comments by "Peter deWolf" (@StoneShards) on "Corporate Media Firms Like CNN Are Behind Big Tech Attacks on Free Speech (Re: Infowars)" video.

  1. No, it's not so simple to create a new legal category that parallels an existing one. It's more efficient to use the existing structures: Twitter has allowed itself to become a de-facto public utility. It is absolutely necessary to codify this development in law! An "internet bill of rights" is toothless: you're essentially asking the media companies to develop a list of rules they are willing to abide by, else why would they agree--and, yes, it would have to be written contract. And when they don't? If it's not a legal entity, you're going to have to have special "arbitration boards" (basically create your own legal system to adjudicate disputes of the rules). An "internet bill of rights" introduces an additional layer of complexity in an already dauntingly complex legal/ethical situation. The only way a bill of rights type of thing can be widely accepted as valid is if it's a legal entity--it's the only way to make it efficiently enforceable.
    1