• SasquatchBanana@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 days ago

        It doesn’t seem they are using free speech in the same sense as the American first amendment (they may not be from the USA). But i would argue that if companies want to play politics, run countries, and be that integrated in people’s lives then free speech as a concept should extend to companies.

        • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 days ago

          As a not-American we don’t say we have freedom of speech, we say we have protected speech and that is more inline with what you want

      • DontMakeMoreBabies@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        Shhhhh… Get out of here with your nuance. Let them screech about the bad private company violating the First Amendment.

        It makes the monkeys feel better.

        Edit:

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          4 days ago

          Let them screech about the bad private company violating the First Amendment.

          How many billions of dollars in government contracts do you need to receive before the line blurs? Microsoft might as well be a subsidiary of the Federal Bureaucracy, given the role it plays in national security, infrastructure, and data management. The US government is its biggest client by far.

        • skisnow@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          4 days ago

          That was the opposite of nuance. It was pedantry that deliberately missed the point.