Twitter, as a public medium open to all, has certain free speech obligations. The fact that it is not a government agency does not absolve the company of these obligations. First, the very existence of Twitter is made possible by all manner of government policies and structures, so a good argument could be made that the First Amendment does apply to its conduct in a “public utility” sense.
The Tech Overlords Will Not Protect You: On Arthur Chu, @ByYourLogic, and “Harassment”
Michael Tracey

This is a ridiculous assertion. I think Chu is a peanut and Felix’s ban is a joke, but Twitter is no more a public utility than the letters page of a newspaper, and can be as arbitrary as it likes about who it allows publishing access.

If you’re going to make a hugely contentious claim as the crux of your argument, you can’t just brush aside the details for “brevity” and expect to be taken seriously.

Show your support

Clapping shows how much you appreciated Dan Treichel’s story.