<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>callalex</author><text>It is seriously unclear to me what ideology you think is promoting censorship the most, from my perspective the cat got out of the bag in the USA and now different kinds of censorship are being advocated for across the political spectrum.</text><parent_chain><item><author>TheCaptain4815</author><text>Considering the censorship is heavily tilted towards one ideology, what incentive does the opposing ideology have to stop this? It worked perfectly fine with no political capital loss in 2020 and 2022 midterms. In fact, most people within that ideology agree with the tech giants and want more censorship.</text></item><item><author>nullifidian</author><text>Considering there are only few actors (the social media, search, internet infrastructure companies) the coercion is unlikely to stop due to a court decision. The government and the legislature have a lot of leverage, up to an anti-trust action, and instead of threatening emails or public statements they could do it with off the record conversations, which are much harder to sue against -- the public wouldn&amp;#x27;t even know. The more questionable is the position of a company regarding anti-trust, title VII, {something else I can&amp;#x27;t think of}, the more leverage the government has.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Appeals court rules White House likely overstepped 1st Amendment on social media</title><url>https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/08/business/appeals-court-first-amendment-social-media.html</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>vorpalhex</author><text>What is likely is that the wheels of censorship will do what they always do and censor that other group. Nobody is immune to censorship for long.&lt;p&gt;Hopefully that will cause enough ruckus that we go back to being anti-censorship.&lt;p&gt;Censorship isn&amp;#x27;t just impacting one group - it&amp;#x27;s a whole bunch of smaller subgroups that make up both parties. It also hurts the uncensored groups because instead of responding to their opponents they are now just shadowboxing themselves in a corner.</text><parent_chain><item><author>TheCaptain4815</author><text>Considering the censorship is heavily tilted towards one ideology, what incentive does the opposing ideology have to stop this? It worked perfectly fine with no political capital loss in 2020 and 2022 midterms. In fact, most people within that ideology agree with the tech giants and want more censorship.</text></item><item><author>nullifidian</author><text>Considering there are only few actors (the social media, search, internet infrastructure companies) the coercion is unlikely to stop due to a court decision. The government and the legislature have a lot of leverage, up to an anti-trust action, and instead of threatening emails or public statements they could do it with off the record conversations, which are much harder to sue against -- the public wouldn&amp;#x27;t even know. The more questionable is the position of a company regarding anti-trust, title VII, {something else I can&amp;#x27;t think of}, the more leverage the government has.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Appeals court rules White House likely overstepped 1st Amendment on social media</title><url>https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/08/business/appeals-court-first-amendment-social-media.html</url></story>