A remarkable amount of debate has surrounded freedom of speech the past few years, particularly with regards to Twitter. As a private company, it should have the right to set parameters for what users say on it. With its outsized public influence, however, first amendment protections are worth considering. There are convincing arguments for both moderation and open expression. In Newsweek, co-founder Brad Polumbo makes the case for open expression…because it leads to moderation.

As his example, he uses the public meltdown of Kanye West. West’s anti-Semitic posts in October have since given way to praise for Hitler. It’s a galling stance that’s received overwhelming pushback. Though the rapper might not get the message (he seems to be in the midst of a very real breakdown), others sharing his opinions should. Consequently, writes Polumbo, they will hopefully reconsider their beliefs or, at the very least, keep them to themselves for fear of drawing more condemnation. Had West never been allowed to make his statements, he and his acolytes could have clung to the raft that their beliefs were worthwhile and painted themselves as victims for not being able to voice them. Such is no longer the case. They were free to express themselves — now they’re free to figure out where they went wrong.