So you want people to be able to post ads that say that people of certain races are inferior? I don't understand.
This is not a free speech issue. This is a paid speech issue.
(I say this not as someone who wants to censor all kinds of stuff, I totally understand your idea that all kinds of ideas should be able to be discussed, but I do make that distinction)
That's not what my question is, perhaps I can reword it to sound less inflammatory. My question is about the distinction between ads and discussions.
OP asks "what happens if you want to discuss" – that phrase itself says "not ads", so an irrelevant question, correct? I understand this is all about their ad policy.
I hate to even sound like a facebook apologist, I deeply, deeply despise that company and Mark Zuckerberg, and I know the only reason they'd change anything is for money, and have absolutely no scruples whatsoever.
But at the end of the day, they're completely free to censor whatever they want. They're not the public sphere.
For me, there isn't a distinction between ads versus other content. "Free speech" refers to "freedom of speech" not free as in "not paid for".
> So you want people to be able to post ads that say that people of certain races are inferior? I don't understand.
I think you're considering a rather extreme example. To continue the Finland immigration example - would an ad for a politician who backs restrictive immigration to reduce crime now be disallowed?
So you want people to be able to post ads that say that people of certain races are inferior? I don't understand.
This is not a free speech issue. This is a paid speech issue.
(I say this not as someone who wants to censor all kinds of stuff, I totally understand your idea that all kinds of ideas should be able to be discussed, but I do make that distinction)