Matt Taibbi

Rank 23 of 47

Score 18

Advocating/inciting violence isn’t protected speech, but just publishing sightings of ICE personnel is. Unless you can show the App makers made threats or marketed the site that way, it’s free speech

Kevin Malvey

@MalveyKevi74611

17d

@mtaibbi Think you’re a great reporter but you’re WAY off base.
I don’t remember anybody in the Twitter files and such advocating for the violence against or murder of FDA or CDC officials. which is exactly what hapoens with these ICE apps.
They’re assaulted regularly and shot at.

12/9/2025, 3:35:06 AM

The statement engages in public discourse by discussing the boundaries of free speech, particularly in relation to apps that publish sightings of ICE personnel. It addresses the legal and ethical implications of such apps and compares them to other forms of protected speech, like speed-trap apps. The statement is part of a broader conversation about the limits of free speech and government intervention, which are significant public issues.

Principle 1:
I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
The statement does not directly cause harm but discusses the potential harm of certain speech acts, maintaining a neutral tone.
Principle 2:
I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
The statement respects the privacy and dignity of others by not engaging in cyberbullying or hate speech, though it touches on the potential for such issues with the apps discussed.
Principle 4:
I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
The statement engages in dialogue and presents a counterpoint to another user's argument without resorting to personal attacks. [+1]
Principle 7:
I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
The statement upholds the principles of free speech by defending the legality of publishing sightings of ICE personnel, while also acknowledging the limits of protected speech. [+1]