What exactly is your argument that this isn’t censorship? They’re providing a private chat platform and preventing certain messages from being sent. As far as I can tell this is the exact definition of censorship.
I don't need to make an argument that it isn't censorship. I'm not making the affirmative claim. If you're curious about how I arrived at a conclusion so easily: we're here discussing it openly on the public Internet.
Every publication that has ever had any editorial control over its platform has exercised it. It’s entitled as hell to think you can use other people’s resources to publish your own thoughts unconstrained.
> I don't need to make an argument that it isn't censorship
Yes you do. This is plain as day censorship. You're not allowed to say certain things to your friends. If you're going to claim that that isn't censorship you are absolutely making the affirmative claim.
No, I don’t. I’m not making the claim. Look, still not making a claim! Still not making an argument. It’s up to “Facebook is censoring me” to make the case that warrants a defense. And I’m not Facebook so I don’t have do defend that. I can just… have this conversation without censorship. And if I get moderated here in a way I hope I won’t be but don’t expect… I can go to my blog or Twitter or whatever.
Facebook isn’t a censor. Proof: we’re having this conversation. I don’t expect to convince you, but I find it ridiculous that I’m being asked to prove a negative because an affirmative position was extended and you’re not willing to critically examine it.
If FB is a censor, they’re extremely bad at it, and not authorized to be good at it.
"It's not censorship if we can still whisper in the back alleys."
So if Facebook isn't ubiquitous and omnipotent they cannot be considered a censor? You're deliberately applying an impossible requirement that you made up. By this requirement there is nobody that can censor, "China doesn't censor because you can still talk about what you want in America." It's absurd.
FB censors private messages between two people on Facebook Messenger. That's the claim. I'd say it's pretty well backed up with proof and facts in this thread.
Censoring is a verb. They censor (remove content they deem objectionable) communication on their platforms. That is the claim. You’re setting up some kind of straw man here saying they aren’t “a censor” because other platforms exist. By your definition, no true censor exists because someone could always communicate directly 1:1 with someone.
