Some thoughts on Alito's concurrence in the Netchoice cases in which he disagrees with the 5+ other justices who wrote that social media platforms have 1st Amendment rights to curate user speech (& he also disagrees with ME). His opinion is poorly reasoned and ahistorical. But 2 special points:
He displays the common fallacy of only seeing censorship he disagrees with & not seeing it if when he too would have censored. He cites to Parler as doing little content moderation. But Parler has 14 categories of "prohibited content." Sex censorship never counts. parler.com/community-gu...
2nd, Alito like many others before him, ahistoricallly lionizes traditional news media making it seem like every newspaper decision is a carefully crafted professional choice rather than "Quick! Find me a wire service story that fits in this space!" Maybe they should spend a few days in a newsroom.
