Trump considering legislation that may scrap law that protects social media companies

[earlinclaifornia]

Twitter CEO Responds to Trump: "We’ll Continue to Point Out Incorrect or Disputed Information About Elections"

 

 

[Sujo]

55 minutes ago, J Town said:

This just in:

In a late-night tweet, President Trump described the Minneapolis protesters as "thugs" and threatened to send in the military, writing, "when the looting starts, the shooting starts." Twitter flagged his tweet for "glorifying" violence, a move that likely fueled Trump's ire with the platform just hours after he unveiled his executive order aimed at limiting the power of social media companies over posted content.

 

It's on now!

Hahaha. Poor trump. Why doesnt he just stop tweeting if he doesnt like their rules. Its not as if he cant just do a press conference and say what he likes.

[Tippaporn]

9 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

If that were the case you'd be agreeing with him. The Democrats and Republicans only pass laws that Americans overwhelmingly disapprove of and fail to pass the laws that they overwhelmingly desire to be passed. You'd think they were serving a different master than the electorate. And if you did think that way, you'd be right.

 

I'd like to share your fatalistic attitude but I won't.  Things will never change if people don't believe they can.  Yours seems to be a world without hope for improvement.  Not my belief nor my style.

[Tippaporn]

9 hours ago, Emdog said:

How about a ratings system similar to film and TV?

And those deciding ratings should be of the sort that run politifact. Washington Post or New York Times should not be involved (I subscribe to NYT, if that matters).

Imperfect? Sure. There should be some way to allow Trump to continue posting unfounded nonsense, but posting of warning (which may be ignored) seems reasonable.

How about letting people figure things out for themselves?  They are capable, you know.  I have no problem.

[Tippaporn]

8 hours ago, Throatwobbler said:

What is setting Trump and his supporters off is that somebody finally stood up to him and called him the liar that he is now Trump and his supporters are behaving like the petulant children that they are. Trump has been shown to lie thousands of times during his presidency. His supporters follow a liar and like to repeat the lies themselves.

 

And you'll vote for Biden?  LOL

[Tippaporn]

7 hours ago, simple1 said:

Read Section 230, moderation of content is permitted by law for a social media provider.  As to the rest of your post, just an echo chamber of trump's efforts to suppress criticism. 

LOL.  You'd make for a poor attorney.

[Tippaporn]

6 hours ago, heybruce said:

So you think a 26 year old law written before the existence of Facebook, Twitter, and much else does not need updating to reflect the world we now live in?  I disagree.  However nothing in the law as I read it prevents Twitter from identifying tweets of dubious accuracy, which is what has Trump outraged.

 

I agree that everyone must decide for themselves what they think is true.  However that doesn't preclude the service that transmits messages from identifying those messages that it considers suspect.

 

Finally, remember that Trump is free to choose what messaging services he uses.  If he doesn't like Twitter, he doesn't have to use it.

Censorship in whatever form does not work.  The founding fathers understood that point well enough to incorporate freedom of speech into the Constitution.  People have forgotten what the founding fathers knew and now that the subject reemerges people put very little thought into it.  They're mostly driven by emotion, which makes for a very poor decision maker.

[Tippaporn]

4 hours ago, johnnybangkok said:

One last time for those at the back of the room and for the hard of hearing; THIS IS NOT CENSORSHIP.  

Trump is free to post whatever drivel he wants but from now on Twitter is putting a little sign at the bottom of his rantings saying things like  'Get the facts about mail-in ballots'.

He is still free to post. He has not been supressed, he has not be prohibited from posting. 

 

Of the approx. 1000 proven instances of voter fraud out of a total voter turnout of some 138 million people who voted in 2016 (https://guides.libraries.psu.edu/post-election-2016/voter-turnout) you get to a whopping 0.0006%. In other words it's a non-issue but one that Trump and the GOP are keen to flog as it does not bode well for either him nor the GOP if there is a large voter turnout. The GOP have benefitted for years through gerrymandering, voter suppression and no/limited mail-in voting so the idea of this happening (and it looks more likely in the midst of a pandemic) fills them with absolute dread and is why Trump is punting this stance whilst also providing no evidence to back his claim. This is why it was rightly fact checked and flagged 'unsubstantiated'.

The background of checkers is irrelavant as it's seldom just one person and well, a facts, a fact is a fact despite what Trump and his fans will try and make you beleive.

 

And getting back to the main point, Trump hasn't been censored, he's been flagged for 'unsubstantiated' claims. He is still free to post on his media outlet of choice (including Twitter), he just can't keep spreading false information like he has done for many, many years without getting called out on it. This has got to be a step in the right direction.   

The statement I made to censorship was not in reference to Trump being fact checked.  LOL  It's astounding how many people can't understand what they read.

[Tippaporn]

31 minutes ago, earlinclaifornia said:

Twitter CEO Responds to Trump: "We’ll Continue to Point Out Incorrect or Disputed Information About Elections"

Dorsey is pushing his luck.  I doubt it ends well for him.

[jimmyswale]

They should kick him off for repeated violations of the terms of use.  Trump wouldn't last a week here before being banned for life. Good. 

[jimmyswale]

Ann Coulter is now flaming Trump on Twitter !

 

"Utterly typical. Big tough talk on Twitter. No action."

[J Town]

3 minutes ago, jimmyswale said:

They should kick him off for repeated violations of the terms of use.  Trump wouldn't last a week here before being banned for life. Good. 

That will eventually happen. The real question is will it happen before or after he loses the election. I used to be concerned he would win 2020 but his cheese is clearly sliding off his cracker. If Biden can just keep his mouth shut between now and then.

[jimmyswale]

Just now, J Town said:

That will eventually happen. The real question is will it happen before or after he loses the election. I used to be concerned he would win 2020 but his cheese is clearly sliding off his cracker. If Biden can just keep his mouth shut between now and then.

Ban him now and take the flak - they are rich enough to lawyer it out. Trump signed up to terms and conditions when came on the platform. With big shot lawyers they would win or at least draw it out for ever. Show him the limits of his power. He can then go and moan on some Hallmark type channel to a handful of his acolytes. I'm sure Alex Jones would give him pride of place. 

[lannarebirth]

4 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

I'd like to share your fatalistic attitude but I won't.  Things will never change if people don't believe they can.  Yours seems to be a world without hope for improvement.  Not my belief nor my style.

Oh, I think things will get better, but more selfish old people will need to die first IMO.

[heybruce]

7 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

Censorship in whatever form does not work.  The founding fathers understood that point well enough to incorporate freedom of speech into the Constitution.  People have forgotten what the founding fathers knew and now that the subject reemerges people put very little thought into it.  They're mostly driven by emotion, which makes for a very poor decision maker.

"Censorship in whatever form does not work."

 

Spell it out for us:  Are you claiming that terrorist recruitment videos, child pornography, illegal scams, and outright lies should not be censored or even identified for what they are?

[Heppinger]

21 minutes ago, heybruce said:

"Censorship in whatever form does not work."

 

Spell it out for us:  Are you claiming that terrorist recruitment videos, child pornography, illegal scams, and outright lies should not be censored or even identified for what they are?

Freedom of speech with consequences for the words you use. 

Therefore subversion, pornography, lies etc. would be not only censored but prosecuted.

[sirineou]

20 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

Especially when their "truth" is hopelessly biased and even false.

if  truth is false does it them mean that lies are true? ????

 

20 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

At that point they become publishers in which case they rightfully lose their protections under Section 230.

 It's incredible how trump supporters suddenly became familiar with "Section 230"  of the Communications Decency Act . of course I know that they are all legal scholars that spend most of their day studying such mundane subjects, but a more suspicious than me person might thing that they are parroting Fox news entertainment shows. 

 So I invite such legal  scholars to enlighten me on the following. Does it then mean that TVF's moderation of posts make them publishers and as such should be legally responsible for everything Tippaporn  posts.?  Please be polite answering or i will be calling my lawyer. 

 Another question. If then Twitter is  a publisher ,  and legally responsible for their content, would they not then have the right, to remove inaccurate twits by trump? or be held liable for publishing falsehoods. 

 

[pookondee]

23 hours ago, DoctorG said:

It is really simple. They are being forced to choose between being a publisher or a platform. They have been fortunate to be able to get away with being a publisher but hanging on to the immunity of pretending to be a platform. This really is not all that difficult to understand.

Why not just simply put the responsibility/culpability right back to the user(s) who post lies and rubbish?

 

If every user had to be verified with I.D, and actually held personally responsible for their own comments, all the rubbish would end tomorrow.

 

[Tippaporn]

3 hours ago, sirineou said:

if  truth is false does it them mean that lies are true? ????

 

 It's incredible how trump supporters suddenly became familiar with "Section 230"  of the Communications Decency Act . of course I know that they are all legal scholars that spend most of their day studying such mundane subjects, but a more suspicious than me person might thing that they are parroting Fox news entertainment shows. 

 So I invite such legal  scholars to enlighten me on the following. Does it then mean that TVF's moderation of posts make them publishers and as such should be legally responsible for everything Tippaporn  posts.?  Please be polite answering or i will be calling my lawyer. 

 Another question. If then Twitter is  a publisher ,  and legally responsible for their content, would they not then have the right, to remove inaccurate twits by trump? or be held liable for publishing falsehoods. 

 

Truth can be made to be lies and lies can be made to be truth.  That is self evident.

 

I've been aware of Section 230 for a long time.  In my view it was only a matter of time before the social media platforms crossed the line.  The law is the law.  Trying to argue that it says differently than it does is not only futile but foolish.  And the law has nothing to do with Fox News.  Fox News may be reporting on the law though.  To suggest that Fox News, by reporting on the law, is somehow creating the law on it's own is either a twisted rationale or simply dishonest.  It can be both, too.

 

TVF operates in Thailand where the laws on free speech are different from those in the U.S.  You can't compare apples to oranges and use it as a logical argument.

 

If Twitter becomes a publisher then they have every right to refuse any or all of Trump's tweets.  Even as an on-line platform they have every right to ban Trump and remove his account for any reason they choose.  They don't even have to be fair in the application of their rules.  That choice might give them other nonlegal problems though.  The market would find a solution.

 

Edited May 30, 2020 by Tippaporn

[simple1]

11 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

LOL.  You'd make for a poor attorney.

Correct, never studied law.

 

My opinion is trump is doubling down on his errors of judgement concerning Twitter and so many of his other grievances. trump is a destroyer, not a builder. IMO trump's isolationism is to the detriment of the USA. Come to think of it perhaps a good idea whilst he is President as he thoroughly pollutes global forums / institutions with dystopian ideology. Now it's been clarified trump is attempting to expose Twitter to law suits for third party content on its platform whilst at the same time trump is currently immune from defamation and so on. trump is a bully and hypocrite extraordinaire. BTW I don't need to be a lawyer to know trump's reactions to criticism are pathetic.

[Tippaporn]

46 minutes ago, earlinclaifornia said:

Yesterday I did put him on ignore but will answer your point. Yes it is amazing how each day goes by having to come up with todays reason to support his everyday BS from this man

Though you won't be reading this, thank you.  People are free to use the site's ignore function but in my opinion by doing so they are merely admitting that they can't handle what another person says so they just shut them out rather than debate them.  Isn't that the entire point of this thread?  Libs can't handle Trump's tweets so they simply want to either shut him out entirely or "fact check" him as a way of giving themselves the final word on an issue he reaises . . . no debate required any longer?  Not a workable solution but you're free to try it.

[Tippaporn]

13 minutes ago, simple1 said:

Correct, never studied law.

 

My opinion is trump is doubling down on his errors of judgement concerning Twitter and so many of his other grievances. trump is a destroyer, not a builder. IMO trump's isolationism is to the detriment of the USA. Come to think of it perhaps a good idea whilst he is President as he thoroughly pollutes global forums / institutions with dystopian ideology. Now it's been clarified trump is attempting to expose Twitter to law suits for third party content on its platform whilst at the same time trump is currently immune from defamation and so on. trump is a bully and hypocrite extraordinaire. BTW I don't need to be a lawyer to know trump's reactions to criticism are pathetic.

It's true.  Nothing will ever move you from biased opinion to actual truth.  As I said before, the truth can be made a lie and a lie can be made the truth.  And some people have the most difficult time distinguishing between the two.  In my opinion, mainly because they're blind to their own bias.

[DoctorG]

30 minutes ago, pookondee said:

Why not just simply put the responsibility/culpability right back to the user(s) who post lies and rubbish?

 

If every user had to be verified with I.D, and actually held personally responsible for their own comments, all the rubbish would end tomorrow.

 

If a site allows lies to be posted, and they are deemed to be a publisher, then they too are liable. eg. A NYT reporter writes something libelous, the offended person can sue both the reporter and the paper.

As to your second point, social media would disappear if we could not write rubbish anonymously ????

Edited May 30, 2020 by DoctorG
spelling error

[Tippaporn]

8 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

Oh, I think things will get better, but more selfish old people will need to die first IMO.

LOL.  That's not the solution to the problem because selfish old people aren't the real problem.  The problems you speak of, in my opinion, have their true origins elsewhere.  It's a question of being able to identify the true origins.  If not then solutions will be attempted to "fix" that which is not "wrong."  To your chagrin not only will the problem still be there but a false solution will only exacerbate the original problem for in fixing something that is not wrong you will have only broken something that was perfectly right.

[simple1]

23 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

It's true.  Nothing will ever move you from biased opinion to actual truth.  As I said before, the truth can be made a lie and a lie can be made the truth.  And some people have the most difficult time distinguishing between the two.  In my opinion, mainly because they're blind to their own bias.

Obviously you're talking about trump and his followers, so thanks for finally acknowledging some facts - it's a beginning...

[Tippaporn]

4 hours ago, heybruce said:

"Censorship in whatever form does not work."

 

Spell it out for us:  Are you claiming that terrorist recruitment videos, child pornography, illegal scams, and outright lies should not be censored or even identified for what they are?

Here's a fact no one can deny.  From the most noble acts man is capable of to the most vilest all is allowed in this world.  Why?  That's a short answer to your question.

[Tippaporn]

24 minutes ago, simple1 said:

  

51 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

It's true.  Nothing will ever move you from biased opinion to actual truth.  As I said before, the truth can be made a lie and a lie can be made the truth.  And some people have the most difficult time distinguishing between the two.  In my opinion, mainly because they're blind to their own bias.

Obviously you're talking about trump and his followers, so thanks for finally acknowledging some facts - it's a beginning...

Obviously I'm talking about you and the rest of the libs here.  Don't try and spin my answer.  LOL

[PatOngo]

On 5/29/2020 at 5:45 AM, Gumballl said:

I could care less if he goes to prison. I just want his name erased from all history books.

I think his name should forever be in the history books together with the likes of Nixon and Bush to show those half interested future generations just exactly what is wrong with American Republicans!

[Langsuan Man]

47 minutes ago, PatOngo said:

I think his name should forever be in the history books together with the likes of Nixon and Bush to show those half interested future generations just exactly what is wrong with American Republicans!

Why would you want to elevate this failed reality star / businessman to the same stature as real politicians !

[J Town]

58 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Obviously I'm talking about you and the rest of the libs here.  Don't try and spin my answer.  LOL

No. Don't even TRY to say Trump isn't the biggest liar of all presidents, and his followers give him a pass. EVERYONE knows it - even Twitter. ESPECIALLY Twitter!