Should Big Tech Censor Speech? | Man on The Street

What's up guys, Aldo here with PragerU. Right now I'm outside the Supreme Court, where they recently decided in Murphy v. Missouri that social media companies censoring speech on their platforms doesn't constitute a First Amendment rights violation. Today I'm in D.C. asking people what they think about this case, and if big tech should censor speech online. Let's go see what people have to say. Should big tech companies be able to censor speech online? I don't think so. No. Not at all. No. Um, I mean, First Amendment, free speech, so. No, absolutely not. Why? Freedom of speech, right? I like not having people, you know, telling me what I can and cannot do. People should be able to say what it is that they feel. I mean, they have to deal with the consequences, repercussions, people lose their jobs sometimes over things they post, but that's, that's life. Well, the First Amendment guarantees our rights to say things that are stupid, as well as offensive, and still, there's consequences, obviously, from that, but we should be able to say what we mean and mean what we say, and we can't do that if people are censoring us. There are lines that need to be drawn, but, um, you can't draw the line for one person while risking someone else's amendment rights. What do you think big tech companies should do about speech that's legal, but could be deemed as hateful or misinformation? Go to her first. She's been killing us. If it's anything harmful, anything like threats, anything like that, then yeah, obviously they should probably censor it. Terrorists' violence, photographing violence, posting it online, I think that should be, that should be deleted. I don't have a problem with people saying how they feel, whether it's offensive or not. In other words, you have thick skin. Yes, I do, and I would rather know. I don't think they should regulate it, to be honest. Like you said, it's free speech, it's not illegal, um, that's, that's the end of the question. Obviously hate speech and stuff, it should not be condoned and should not be encouraged, but that also comes with free speech. So it's the kind of moral grounds that you're walking, and that's more of a moral argument, I would say, versus kind of legality wise. I don't know. I don't have the answers. Um, that's why I'm not in there. The Supreme Court recently decided that when the government during COVID was requesting social media companies censor certain speech that they deemed to be misinformation, it did not constitute a first amendment rights violation, essentially saying that private companies are able to censor speech. First of all, what's your initial reaction to that? And do you think that it will embolden companies, these big tech companies to censor even more speech? Um, I mean, I think it would embolden them to do that just because you do it once, then they just keep pushing and pushing and pushing until they see what they can get out of it. It should be like an open dialogue, open debate rather than, oh, we got to cancel this or we got to get rid of that because someone feels a certain way. I think private companies should stay the f*** out of people's business. When it comes to social media, it feels like something that's not a private company because it's so expansive in our generation, but it truly is. And I think that I can't tell a private company what to do. Just like somebody couldn't tell my company if I made one, what to do. That's it for this one, you guys. If you guys enjoyed this video, be sure to give it a thumbs up, share it with your friends and please consider subscribing to Prager U so you don't miss out on any more videos like this. Make sure to follow me and Prager U across social medias and I'll see you guys in the next video. Woo!