This post could have been a long Twitter thread, but I didn't want to make it so. So here it is:

Social media platforms are private businesses with enormous power over public discourse- but even if we're not in a perfect world, at least in "The West", we live in an age of unprecedented free speech. What's the last time you heard of someone being convicted for indecency?

State affronts against free speech are either null or impotent. Argentina's center for what some may call "SJW censorship", the INADI is an absolute deadweight that fails to serve the needs of minority communities, and to prosecute those guilty of hate crimes - be they of a physical or a cultural nature.

Most "pro-freeze peach" discourse is just complaining that people you don't like have equal access to online platforms.

Of course, if we get down to the details, while potentially anyone can play the algorithmic game, corporations with the firing power to unleash content floods, or strategize and speculate still have an upper hand when it comes to content outreach.

But if, like Freeze Peach conservatives routinely do when it comes to most sectors, we push the corporations behind the curtain, and leave them as unscrutinizable actors, both the ghost and the machine, we can decisively state that speech as never been so free. Free-to-use (and potentially profitable), long-reaching, loosely regulated communication channels like the ones we enjoy today are unprecedented.

And that wide access itself can obscure the true character of some of the actors that operate in the digital field. Social media platforms are the perfect ground for astroturfing.

In fact, one of the political moments that carried me by the nose during my teenage years (the so-called "Culture Wars") were, in part, an effort of corporate astroturfing, on the part of conservative-authoritarian interests. Interests that have and will mutate through time, adopting similarly "popular" facades.