Dear Editor,

I would like to comment on the controversy surrounding the media entities who have banned Donald Trump from their platforms. I read an article where an Editor stated that this sets an alarming precedent.

I think not!

Trump was banned from Facebook and Twitter for speech that was considered inflammatory. His actions were in violation of the specific Terms and Conditions set forth by these entities as a right of use.

This applies to anyone who uses these platforms.

I ran across a statement on a social media site that stated that you have to serve whoever comes into a bakery, but you are censured on social media for speaking your mind. This is a misconception. There is a difference between the First Amendment right of Freedom of Speech and the Terms and Conditions of a valid contract to which a provider and user agree upon.

When you sign up to use these platforms, they state that by clicking onto the site you agree to their Terms and Conditions of use. A link is located in the small print and it is a binding contract that spells out specifically what constitutes a violation.

What Trump said on Twitter violated what he agreed too. This is not suppression of speech but a breach of contract.

It is strictly a violation of an agreed upon contract by both parties, nothing more nothing less.

I have been involved in labor relations for a long time and believe in the sanctity of a signed contract. A breach of contract is actionable. I have read their Terms and Conditions and there are specifics about what they deem as inflammatory rhetoric and what is considered acceptable speech.

Before you agree to these platforms be sure of what you are agreeing to.

Frank Papini,

President, USW S.O.A.R. Chapter 23-9

St. Clairsville