ADVERTISEMENT

Husband of Scarborough Employee Rips Trump's 'Vicious Lie'

It's an interesting conversation. Say that someone goes into a Walmart and starts bothering people by insisting that President Trump had Jeffery Epstein killed so that his past sex crimes wouldn't be revealed. If Walmart tells that person to stop spreading false conspiracy theories or they'll be removed from the store, should Walmart be treated like a traditional publisher?
Not Trump but it was Bill Clinton!
 
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-twitter-trump-executive-order-idUSKBN2333BT

This makes total sense coming from the anti-regulation president.

image.png
 
Um...thanks MOTO. That's exactly the argument Twitter makes.
Austensibly Twitter isn't, but once they begin to produce and manage content, then they blur the lines. They have a liability carve out because they are just the pipe thru which all that sewage flows. Once they start fouling the waters, they become fair game don't you think?
 
Austensibly Twitter isn't, but once they begin to produce and manage content, then they blur the lines. They have a liability carve out because they are just the pipe thru which all that sewage flows. Once they start fouling the waters, they become fair game don't you think?

It depends what you mean by fouling the waters. The line between publisher and distributor are blurred a lot already as vertical integration is increasingly accepted by the powers-that-be in today's political landscape.
 
It depends what you mean by fouling the waters. The line between publisher and distributor are blurred a lot already as vertical integration is increasingly accepted by the powers-that-be in today's political landscape.
It's a regular Pandora's can of worms to fact-check political speech. I hear a lot about conservative causes getting banned and blocked. I don't get on much myself. Tweets are "thought selfies" and the whole concept just feels greasy to me. Interesting it will be when non-trumps begin getting censored. What happens when its a cause or individual you support...
 
What is the 230 carve out referring to?

Also, is the local paper required to publish crackpot Letters to the Editor?
Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act
Okay, so a brief look at the Wiki page refreshed my memory.

I don't see how this is applicable. I've seen no one claim that Twitter should be held liable for any of Trumps lies or libels.

All I've seen people calling for is for Twitter -- of its own volition -- taking steps to block or remove or at the very least fact check the false, vile content of its users when appropriate. Oh, and laughing at Trump for thinking he can "as President" do anything about it.
 
Okay, so a brief look at the Wiki page refreshed my memory.

I don't see how this is applicable. I've seen no one claim that Twitter should be held liable for any of Trumps lies or libels.

All I've seen people calling for is for Twitter -- of its own volition -- taking steps to block or remove or at the very least fact check the false, vile content of its users when appropriate. Oh, and laughing at Trump for thinking he can "as President" do anything about it.
It's a threat, see. The argument is essentially this: If you're going to police our guy's content, we are going to treat you like a publisher, and hold you responsible for all the other folks' content that you should have policed, but didn't.

For example, say someone commits suicide because they are bullied on social media. Under the normal reading of the CDA, Twitter would not be liable for the bullying. But if they lose their 230 exemption, they could be.
 
It's a threat, see. The argument is essentially this: If you're going to police our guy's content, we are going to treat you like a publisher, and hold you responsible for all the other folks' content that you should have policed, but didn't.

For example, say someone commits suicide because they are bullied on social media. Under the normal reading of the CDA, Twitter would not be liable for the bullying. But if they lose their 230 exemption, they could be.
Except that would require a reversal of precedent by the courts, correct? It's not like Trump can order the FCC to change how 230 is applied, is it? So as usual, it's all Trump bullshit and bluster, threatening to do shit that no one believes will ever be followed through with.
 
Except that would require a reversal of precedent by the courts, correct? It's not like Trump can order the FCC to change how 230 is applied, is it? So as usual, it's all Trump bullshit and bluster, threatening to do shit that no one believes will ever be followed through with.
Has he overridden the governors yet?
 
Except that would require a reversal of precedent by the courts, correct? It's not like Trump can order the FCC to change how 230 is applied, is it? So as usual, it's all Trump bullshit and bluster, threatening to do shit that no one believes will ever be followed through with.
And that is exactly what the nimrod is trying to do. Not that it will get anywhere, but hey, let's pwn the lib Twits.
 
Except that would require a reversal of precedent by the courts, correct? It's not like Trump can order the FCC to change how 230 is applied, is it? So as usual, it's all Trump bullshit and bluster, threatening to do shit that no one believes will ever be followed through with.
Correct. It is both a threat and bluster at the same time.
 
Correct. It is both a threat and bluster at the same time.

I never believed Trump would do anything he knew would be enforced. Mainly because he’s a feckless coward who’s afraid of his morbidly obese shadow but also because if this gets enforced the way he’s threatening, both Twitter and Facebook would likely have to temporarily shutdown while they evaluate their new liabilities and set up new ways to police their platforms. He’s not about to give up his favorite toy in Twitter and the Russian bots don’t want to lose Facebook.
 
Except that would require a reversal of precedent by the courts, correct? It's not like Trump can order the FCC to change how 230 is applied, is it? So as usual, it's all Trump bullshit and bluster, threatening to do shit that no one believes will ever be followed through with.

Exactly. Nobody including the FCC wants a precedent like that. Twitter would instantly be gone as they cannot stop Trump's lies without stopping any other public figure's including those from the left.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT