Yes but what you don’t see is the many many requests in the same tone that come into social media (and traditional media!) companies from corporations, celebrities, even regular old citizens who are mad their drunk driving arrest got reported (for example).

The idea that an imperious tone somehow proves a power imbalance is hilarious to anyone who has ever been on the receiving end of these requests from regular people. “I demand an answer right now” is what angry diners say when a restaurant runs of the special. It’s the tone that people adopt to imply power when they don’t actually have power, but want to seem like they do. Which is a common, and legal, mode of speaking in everyday life.

This is not talking about "regular old citizens". This is the government and the government has power. Your comment is basically a Straw man.

No, the point of the comment is that the government didn't have power in this situation.

The government has power. Craig the office drone asking for "misinformation" to be taken down at behest of his boss does not have the power "The government" does.

Or am I now supposed to believe that if you anger Sheila at the DMV the IRS will audit you?

> The government has power. Craig the office drone asking for "misinformation" to be taken down at behest of his boss does not have the power "The government" does. Or am I now supposed to believe that if you anger Sheila at the DMV the IRS will audit you?

Craig's boss is the highest executive power in the country. Most of their work is handled by aides and subordinates like Craig, with authority delegated from their office. The boss only directly makes the important decisions. You are being disingenuous by claiming Craig is a innocent, powerless trigger-happy drone. And if you have lived in small towns, expect to receive worse service or discrimination from Sheila in future. The highest power in the country cannot be held to the same standard as a county clerk (and frankly speaking, most DMV employees need more training in customer service and have their compensation tied to overall productivity and performance, lots of fat to be trimmed there, both literal and metaphorical).

I invite you to have a conversation with my six year old child and then reflect upon the difference between power dynamics as they exist and as they are vocalised.

Your toddler doesn't represent the United States Government.

You make a good point. The United States Government is more like a demanding toddler throwing a tantrum than a 6 year old throwing a tantrum. The difference is the 6 year old is potty trained.

What impact does that have on the difference between power dynamics as they exist and as they’re vocalised?

You don't see a difference between a toddler being demanding with a parent and the federal government demanding something of a corporation? What kind of Republican's wet dream do you live in where those power dynamics are akin?

> What kind of Republican's wet dream do you live in where those power dynamics are akin?

Have we already forgotten that it’s the left pushing for the censorship?

When will the left quit trying to flamebait and start focusing on repairing the divisions caused by attempting to demonize the other side.

You misunderstand my point.

No, I ignored your point because you reduced it to name calling. There’s a difference.

Quit being a democrat, my point stands.

I mean, it's also the tone of a kid not getting what they want from their non-subordinate parent.

Are they subordinate if they can disobey those order with no reprecussions?

Is a demand not still inappropriate even if it's correctly rebuffed? If I ask for someone to violate policy at work and they refuse, I can still expect I might be investigated on the basis of the attempt

I mean, sure, in terms of jurisprudence here the lack of actual tort may indeed mean that there is no legal outcome, but evidence a desire to do something is a pretty good justification for investigating if there were cases where you did do it. And in the court of public opinion, it's very damning. I certainly won't be saying "no harm, no foul"

Maybe, but calling them a subordinate is still misleading as fuck.

And I see refusal to follow those orders from a person who recognizes they're not a subordinate.