Twitter Hides POTUS Tweet

I feel like this is a good time to remind people that Joe Biden also wants to repeal Section 230 because he's pissed at Facebook.
Charlie Warzel: Sure. Mr. Vice President, in October, your campaign sent a letter to Facebook regarding an ad that falsely claimed that you blackmailed Ukrainian officials to not investigate your son. I’m curious, did that experience, dealing with Facebook and their power, did that change the way that you see the power of tech platforms right now?
No, I’ve never been a fan of Facebook, as you probably know. I’ve never been a big Zuckerberg fan. I think he’s a real problem. I think ——
CW: Can you elaborate?
No, I can. He knows better. And you know, from my perspective, I’ve been in the view that not only should we be worrying about the concentration of power, we should be worried about the lack of privacy and them being exempt, which you’re not exempt. [The Times] can’t write something you know to be false and be exempt from being sued. But he can.
The idea that it’s a tech company is that Section 230 should be revoked, immediately should be revoked, number one. For Zuckerberg and other platforms.
Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act says that online platforms aren’t held liable for things their users post on them, with some exceptions. In July, The Times’s Sarah Jeong weighed in on proposed updates to Section 230, arguing that “we should reopen the debate on C.D.A. 230 only because so much of the internet has changed,” but “the discourse will be improved if we all take a moment to actually read the text of C.D.A. 230.”
Click to expand...
CW: That’s a pretty foundational laws of the modern internet.
That’s right. Exactly right. And it should be revoked. It should be revoked because it is not merely an internet company. It is propagating falsehoods they know to be false, and we should be setting standards not unlike the Europeans are doing relative to privacy. You guys still have editors. I’m sitting with them. Not a joke. There is no editorial impact at all on Facebook. None. None whatsoever. It’s irresponsible. It’s totally irresponsible.
Click to expand...
No matter who wins this year's US presidential election, we are about to be saddled with a technologically illiterate leader who wants to take away one of the most fundamental building blocks of the internet because he's mad at social media. People have every reason to be worried.
 
  • Like
  • Feels
  • Agree
Reactions: Ira the Weatherman, Kot Johansson, Aberforth and 26 others
  • Like
Reactions: Return of the Freaker
Screen Shot 2020-05-29 at 11.53.13 AM.png


All that anger you're directing at me, send it Trump's way. HE'S the one that wants to regulate our Internet shitposting.

giphy.gif
 
  • Mad at the Internet
  • Autistic
  • Dumb
Reactions: Μusk, Ask Jeeves, Star Stuff and 45 others
crocodilian said:
I liked your earlier comment about not exploding over fresh news, but now you seem to be encouraging people to rile themselves up just as quickly. Which is it?

If you truly feel so inflamed over this news,
Click to expand...
Nuance and reading comprehension are beyond you huh? There is a middle ground between complacency and defcon 1.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Yotsubaaa, Pina Colada, Desktop User2 and 1 other person
  • Like
  • Feels
  • Agree
Reactions: Allanon, Ira the Weatherman, Kot Johansson and 8 others
Absolutego said:
None of the legal actions taken thus far threaten this website. Trump's incontinent blathering on twitter isn't legal action.
Click to expand...
To be fair, he did issue the ban on Trans people serving in the military through Twitter. There was legitimate debate as to whether this represents an actual government mandate.

Who knows? Maybe the Farms is now responsible for everything everyone has ever written, including the defamatory screenshots reposted from other sites. Could mean infinite liability and international reciprocity through treaty.

Big if true.
 
  • Optimistic
Reactions: The Last Stand
HTTP Error 404 said:
Twitter was found to be a public space, thanks to a New York Judge with TDS doing a colossal stretch to stop ORANGE MAN BAD from blocking the Shareblue bots that flood his replies every single day. Thus, Twitter is required to uphold the 1st Amendment.
Click to expand...
That's a really extreme stretch. This sort of thing is usually held to be particular to the function the company is doing on behalf of the government, and doesn't inherit to the company's other functions. For example, when the government holds an event at a convention space, the convention space is required to allow for 1st Amendment rights to be exercised (to some degree; many sarcastic comments were made about "freedom of speech zones"), but that doesn't imply that the convention space has to hold any event it's requested to. Additionally, if someone had a prior ban from that convention space for an unrelated reason, they would probably still be prohibited from that event, though using a company as a proxy to mask the government's decisions is disallowed.

The last time the federal government tried to regulate speech in favor of "fairness", it wasn't great then. I don't think many people are wishing for the Fairness Doctrine to come back. You can try to make an argument that strict moderation is little different from publishing, but it would be very hard to divide them cleanly.
 
Null said:
No, it's over. This has proven to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that the American population can only think in terms of what the Govenrment can do for them. Everything must be handled by a Government apparatus and when Section 230 is inevitably destroyed (if not now, soon) it will be replaced by a subcommittee within the FCC, because look at how good the FCC was for television and film.
Click to expand...

Oh god, this post just reminded me that they were already trying to destroy Section 230 with the EARN IT bill.

... So this is basically Trump joining up with whatever toxic swamp creatures were already going after Section 230.
 
  • Horrifying
Reactions: Aberforth
HTTP Error 404 said:
Twitter was found to be a public space, thanks to a New York Judge with TDS doing a colossal stretch to stop ORANGE MAN BAD from blocking the Shareblue bots that flood his replies every single day. Thus, Twitter is required to uphold the 1st Amendment.
Click to expand...
The "public forum" characterization comes from a Supreme Court decision overturning North Carolina's attempts to ban pedos from social media. That case (Packingham vs. North Carolina) is called out by name in the Executive Order Trump signed yesterday.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Iwasamwillbe and Buttigieg2020
Null said:
No, it's over. This has proven to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that the American population can only think in terms of what the Govenrment can do for them. Everything must be handled by a Government apparatus and when Section 230 is inevitably destroyed (if not now, soon) it will be replaced by a subcommittee within the FCC, because look at how good the FCC was for television and film.
Click to expand...

spy.png


Are you reading any of these replies, or are you posting solely to have a big cry?

There's plenty of reasonable interpretations ITT, suggesting there's no reason to panic (and what you can do in the meantime to show the president repealing Section 230 is a bad idea.) You're "the Kiwifarms guy." Stop acting like one of the subjects of mockery on your own website show a little dignity, please.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Feels
Reactions: Ira the Weatherman, BubbleButt, din_far and 14 others
Coh said:
I don't make money off of the Internet nor do I use it as my primary vehicle of social interactions. This basically only affects people that host sites, and I don't intend to do that. So yeah, it doesn't fucking affect me. Unless the Orange Nigger actually does even more anti-2A shit than the bumpstock fuckery or otherwise directly impede upon my rights, I actually don't care. Even if I am using the law implicitly by posting here, I can still express my 1A rights in the real world really.
Click to expand...
The libertarian mindset everyone, "fuck you I have mine"
 
  • Feels
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Kot Johansson, Aberforth, Yotsubaaa and 18 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back