Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 173

Thread: Trump to end liability protections for "social media outlets" with Executive Order

  1. #1

    Trump to end liability protections for "social media outlets" with Executive Order

    https://www.zerohedge.com/technology...trump-postings

    Gaetz said:

    A lot of people don’t see that Facebook and Twitter … you see Twitter disadvantaging the president, they enjoy liability protections that are not enjoyed by your local newspaper or your local TV station, or Fox News, or CNN, or MSNBC. They have special benefits under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act as digital platforms because they’re not creating content for which they should be liable. They’re not making decisions about content, they’re simply saying come one, come all with your content. And as a consequence of that, they’re getting a bunch of protections.
    And Republicans will cheer hooray! This is actually backdoor legislation to allow lawsuits against websites like RPF, where inconvenient speech is still allowed and not (usually) censored. Currently, RPF can't be sued for the content posted on the site and maintains immunity under the same section 230. Since FB, Twitter, etc are Deep State sponsored creations and large components of stock markets and future agendas (see: Facebook's Libra cryptocurrency), they are not at risk of being shut down or seriously impeded in any material way. They do, however, make for useful excuses to pass statutes that will then be enforced against everyone else.
    "Let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    The entire internet is the domain of paid shills and bots. If you don't know this by now....

    Israel, under control of the Crown and, ultimately, the Vatican, own the USA. If you don't know this by now....

    Talk to people about liberty. You won't find it on websites, you won't find it in politicians.

    But now you can't talk to people because of "social distancing"....brought to you by shills and politicians.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by devil21 View Post
    https://www.zerohedge.com/technology...trump-postings



    And Republicans will cheer hooray! This is actually backdoor legislation to allow lawsuits against websites like RPF, where inconvenient speech is still allowed and not (usually) censored. Currently, RPF can't be sued for the content posted on the site and maintains immunity under the same section 230. Since FB, Twitter, etc are Deep State sponsored creations and large components of stock markets and future agendas (see: Facebook's Libra cryptocurrency), they are not at risk of being shut down or seriously impeded in any material way. They do, however, make for useful excuses to pass statutes that will then be enforced against everyone else.
    Whoop there it is.
    “The right to life is the source of all rights—and the right to property is their only implementation. Without property rights, no other rights are possible. Since man has to sustain his life by his own effort, the man who has no right to the product of his effort has no means to sustain his life. The man who produces while others dispose of his product, is a slave.”

    Read the RPF trolls' playbook here (post #3)

  4. #3
    With each passing day lately, it is something new Trump is saying or doing that makes me believe he trying really hard to lose in November. This election should be a cake walk for him if he just stuck to what he ran on instead of continually betraying his base and things like this.

    H-1B immigration during a pandemic with massive unemployment and this is a deal killer. If Biden gets elected the best I could hope for is the country to breakup into Progressive and Conservative regions since no one is going to put up with that nonsense Biden is running on.

    If this keeps up I bet the next thing Trump does is to thank the Minneapolis cops for their service so he can shed more potential voters.
    Last edited by kahless; 05-27-2020 at 08:57 PM.

  5. #4

  6. #5
    Trump should use Gab or some other alternative. It would be the single biggest action that could be taken to introduce some competition to the current popular social media cabal.
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul
    They are what they hate.” - B4L


    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  7. #6
    I would go a step farther. They were pretty much given government access and protection in order to do immoral things that might not of been illegal but were wrong. The democrats used social media and tech monopolies that they created to reverse engineer the first and fourth amendment. You are so brainwashed they even have you thinking that the government is supposed to protect the speech of social media websites. That basically means that anything on their website isnt even your speech. Your mom facebooks you nope that was the website talking to you. You see how upside down that is?? Electronic speech is how people talk to eachother nowadays and that speech ought to be protected from technologies that reverse engineer the constitution. Your fourth amendment should be protected they shouldnt be able to use private business as a cover up to subvert your rights.

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by nikcers View Post
    Fake news. Where does it say anywhere that Trump was targeting section 230. Joe Biden said he was going to if he wins though.
    It's ok if you can't put 2 and 2 together to see where this going. Trump doesn't have authority to issue any direct EOs regarding what Twitter/"social media" does but Congress does and Gaetz already let the cat out of the bag as to what the agenda is. Whatever Trump's EO says is to soften up Republicans for the incoming assault on free speech that Congress is cooking up. You haven't figured out how this works yet?
    "Let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    The entire internet is the domain of paid shills and bots. If you don't know this by now....

    Israel, under control of the Crown and, ultimately, the Vatican, own the USA. If you don't know this by now....

    Talk to people about liberty. You won't find it on websites, you won't find it in politicians.

    But now you can't talk to people because of "social distancing"....brought to you by shills and politicians.

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by devil21 View Post
    It's ok if you can't put 2 and 2 together to see where this going. Trump doesn't have authority to issue any direct EOs regarding what Twitter/"social media" does but Congress does and Gaetz already let the cat out of the bag as to what the agenda is. Whatever Trump's EO says is to soften up Republicans for the incoming assault on free speech that Congress is cooking up. You haven't figured out how this works yet?
    You mean like the elections when democrats censored conservative emails in millions of americans accounts by labeling them spam so they dont go out and vote?? I know whats coming up. The democrats want to cheat. The same way they took the house.



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by devil21 View Post
    https://www.zerohedge.com/technology...trump-postings



    And Republicans will cheer hooray! This is actually backdoor legislation to allow lawsuits against websites like RPF, where inconvenient speech is still allowed and not (usually) censored. Currently, RPF can't be sued for the content posted on the site and maintains immunity under the same section 230. Since FB, Twitter, etc are Deep State sponsored creations and large components of stock markets and future agendas (see: Facebook's Libra cryptocurrency), they are not at risk of being shut down or seriously impeded in any material way. They do, however, make for useful excuses to pass statutes that will then be enforced against everyone else.
    You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to devil21 again.

    I am just as much against this bias by social media as anybody, as it has harmed the Health Impact News network. But not because of "right vs. left" wars. We publish the truth about Big Pharma which they routinely label as "Fake News," even if what we publish are actual government documents, such as the quarterly DOJ reports about settlements for vaccine injuries and deaths in the U.S. Vaccine Court.

    But my recourse is NOT to ask government to protect me, but to sue them in court for libel/slander, which is really what Trump should be doing.

    They are slandering him which can cause real loss, at least theoretically, if you believe people who vote determine elections.

    I don't know about Twitter, but Facebook is located in California, and when I looked into what it would take to find a law firm to file a suit against them in California, it was nearly impossible. Almost every single case I looked up to find out who the attorneys were in previous lawsuits where Facebook was the defendant, showed that the plaintiffs were pro se litigants. As I researched further, I found out that Facebook has most of the high end lawfirms in California on their payroll, so that they all would have "conflicts of interest" if you tried to hire them.

    This can't be solved by an EO, but I am curious to see what he comes up with.
    There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. For fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not been perfected in love.
    (1 John 4:18)

  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Created4 View Post
    You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to devil21 again.

    I am just as much against this bias by social media as anybody, as it has harmed the Health Impact News network. But not because of "right vs. left" wars. We publish the truth about Big Pharma which they routinely label as "Fake News," even if what we publish are actual government documents, such as the quarterly DOJ reports about settlements for vaccine injuries and deaths in the U.S. Vaccine Court.

    But my recourse is NOT to ask government to protect me, but to sue them in court for libel/slander, which is really what Trump should be doing.

    They are slandering him which can cause real loss, at least theoretically, if you believe people who vote determine elections.

    I don't know about Twitter, but Facebook is located in California, and when I looked into what it would take to find a law firm to file a suit against them in California, it was nearly impossible. Almost every single case I looked up to find out who the attorneys were in previous lawsuits where Facebook was the defendant, showed that the plaintiffs were pro se litigants. As I researched further, I found out that Facebook has most of the high end lawfirms in California on their payroll, so that they all would have "conflicts of interest" if you tried to hire them.

    This can't be solved by an EO, but I am curious to see what he comes up with.
    They cant be sued because they have immunity thats the point.

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by nikcers View Post
    You mean like the elections when democrats censored conservative emails in millions of americans accounts by labeling them spam so they dont go out and vote?? I know whats coming up. The democrats want to cheat. The same way they took the house.
    Republicans Democrats blah blah blah. *yawn*
    "Let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    The entire internet is the domain of paid shills and bots. If you don't know this by now....

    Israel, under control of the Crown and, ultimately, the Vatican, own the USA. If you don't know this by now....

    Talk to people about liberty. You won't find it on websites, you won't find it in politicians.

    But now you can't talk to people because of "social distancing"....brought to you by shills and politicians.

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by nikcers View Post
    They cant be sued because they have immunity thats the point.
    Not true at all. They can be sued, and have been sued many times....
    There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. For fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not been perfected in love.
    (1 John 4:18)

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by devil21 View Post
    Republicans Democrats blah blah blah. *yawn*
    Facts matter. They won the house by dumping Republicans emails into spam or not delivering them at all in a lot of cases and thats why they won because people dont go out and vote in elections they dont hear about or get reminded of.

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Created4 View Post
    Not true at all. They can be sued, and have been sued many times....
    Section 230 protects them from being sued because they claim they are not exercising speech they are merely a microphone.

  17. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by nikcers View Post
    Section 230 protects them from being sued because they claim they are not exercising speech they are merely a microphone.
    They have been sued. Many, many times. I deal with facts, not ideological fantasies.
    There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. For fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not been perfected in love.
    (1 John 4:18)

  18. #16
    “The right to life is the source of all rights—and the right to property is their only implementation. Without property rights, no other rights are possible. Since man has to sustain his life by his own effort, the man who has no right to the product of his effort has no means to sustain his life. The man who produces while others dispose of his product, is a slave.”

    Read the RPF trolls' playbook here (post #3)



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Created4 View Post
    They have been sued. Many, many times. I deal with facts, not ideological fantasies.
    LOL. Yeah facts are great. All of these companies are more powerful than ever. More money than ever. Monopoly on public discourse and speech and access to everyones data. They are king. They can sway elections or buy politicians with money they receive from government.

  21. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Created4 View Post
    You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to devil21 again.

    I am just as much against this bias by social media as anybody, as it has harmed the Health Impact News network. But not because of "right vs. left" wars. We publish the truth about Big Pharma which they routinely label as "Fake News," even if what we publish are actual government documents, such as the quarterly DOJ reports about settlements for vaccine injuries and deaths in the U.S. Vaccine Court.

    But my recourse is NOT to ask government to protect me, but to sue them in court for libel/slander, which is really what Trump should be doing.

    They are slandering him which can cause real loss, at least theoretically, if you believe people who vote determine elections.

    I don't know about Twitter, but Facebook is located in California, and when I looked into what it would take to find a law firm to file a suit against them in California, it was nearly impossible. Almost every single case I looked up to find out who the attorneys were in previous lawsuits where Facebook was the defendant, showed that the plaintiffs were pro se litigants. As I researched further, I found out that Facebook has most of the high end lawfirms in California on their payroll, so that they all would have "conflicts of interest" if you tried to hire them.

    This can't be solved by an EO, but I am curious to see what he comes up with.
    For website operators like you: This EO, Gaetz' legislation and the "Covid-19 Cause of Action" legislation that PAF posted a thread on are very possibly complementary components. A new "Cause of Action" is the creation of a new legal justification to sue or prosecute an entity/person, which didn't previously exist. It will be wise to see what is defined as "social media" in that legislation. Do you allow comments on your posts, for instance? That could broadly be considered "social media". Depending on that legal definition enshrined in the legislation, it very well could mean that websites like yours could be sued by some newly created "anti-disinformation non-profit org" for posting content that is suddenly illegal under the new Cause of Action.

    It could also mean that social media outlets would have a newly created justification to censor anyone linking to your site on FB. "We support your speech but we don't want to be sued!" *wink nod*

    eta: Thinking on this a bit more, my last sentence will probably be the most common usage of this new censorship agenda, with actual suits/prosecutions being reserved only for the most egregious "offenders" aka the "made examples of" offenders. The creation of a new justification for the main social media outlets to censor anything not agenda-compliant. After this is passed, watch for a high profile "example" like Alex Jones being sued that can be splashed across headlines everywhere as a tool to scare the small website operators.
    Last edited by devil21; 05-27-2020 at 09:50 PM.
    "Let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    The entire internet is the domain of paid shills and bots. If you don't know this by now....

    Israel, under control of the Crown and, ultimately, the Vatican, own the USA. If you don't know this by now....

    Talk to people about liberty. You won't find it on websites, you won't find it in politicians.

    But now you can't talk to people because of "social distancing"....brought to you by shills and politicians.

  22. #19

  23. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by devil21 View Post
    For website operators like you: This EO, Gaetz' legislation and the "Covid-19 Cause of Action" legislation that PAF posted a thread on are very possibly complementary components. A new "Cause of Action" is the creation of a new legal justification to sue or prosecute an entity/person, which didn't previously exist. It will be wise to see what is defined as "social media" in that legislation. Do you allow comments on your posts, for instance? That could broadly be considered "social media". Depending on that legal definition enshrined in the legislation, it very well could mean that websites like yours could be sued by some newly created "anti-disinformation non-profit org" for posting content that is suddenly illegal under the new Cause of Action.

    It could also mean that social media outlets would have a newly created justification to censor anyone linking to your site on FB. "We support your speech but we don't want to be sued!" *wink nod*

    eta: Thinking on this a bit more, my last sentence will probably be the most common usage of this new censorship agenda, with actual suits/prosecutions being reserved only for the most egregious "offenders" aka the "made examples of" offenders. The creation of a new justification for the main social media outlets to censor anything not agenda-compliant.
    Certainly possible. And don't think I don't know this already.

    All eyes will be on Alex Jones, because he is the first one they will take down.
    There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. For fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not been perfected in love.
    (1 John 4:18)

  24. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Created4 View Post
    Certainly possible. And don't think I don't know this already.

    All eyes will be on Alex Jones, because he is the first one they will take down.
    Yeah I added something about AJ before I even read your reply. I'm pretty sure he's controlled opposition now but would make a very public example to scare the small website operators.


    Quote Originally Posted by nikcers View Post
    How is it not terrorism to collude with career politicians and unelected beurocrats to bypass the bill of rights? How is it not slavery by other means?
    Technically, the BoR only restrains government, not corporations (eta: the federal "government" is actually a corporation, think on what that means and why "government" ignores the BoR all the time). This is why the original 13th Amendment to the Constitution prohibited lawyers (titles of nobility, aka 'Esquire', a british lawyer title) from holding public office but that was memory-holed in the aftermath of the Civil War and old 13th erased and replaced with the new 13th.

    These days, shell corps and 501s are created to avoid the appearance (if only on paper) of the government violating the BoR. The paper corp/501 does the actual dirty work. 99.9% of what's going to today is nothing more than "lawfare" and that is what the Founders wished to avoid with the original 13th Amendment.
    Last edited by devil21; 05-31-2020 at 11:12 AM.
    "Let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    The entire internet is the domain of paid shills and bots. If you don't know this by now....

    Israel, under control of the Crown and, ultimately, the Vatican, own the USA. If you don't know this by now....

    Talk to people about liberty. You won't find it on websites, you won't find it in politicians.

    But now you can't talk to people because of "social distancing"....brought to you by shills and politicians.

  25. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by devil21 View Post
    Yeah I added something about AJ before I even read your reply. I'm pretty sure he's controlled opposition now but would make a very public example to scare the small website operators.
    I don't know how "controlled" he is as opposition (I honestly don't think he can be controlled at all), but they have already gone to great lengths to suppress him. I think I even read a while back that his ISP was threatening to block him, and that would have been really serious, as I think the FTC then gets involved. It obviously didn't happen, as he is still up and running.
    There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. For fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not been perfected in love.
    (1 John 4:18)

  26. #23
    You can't be a publisher and a platform.
    Facebook has actually claimed to be both at different times in legal disputes.

    The law says they have to meet certain criteria to get certain benefits, if that law is enforced then what is the problem?
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  27. #24
    This censorship agenda piece was also disclosed in Bill Gates' "Event 201" coronavirus exercise from 2019, before anybody ever heard of Covid-19. Shutting down "certain parts of the internet" to "combat misinformation" regarding a coronavirus pandemic was part of the plan.


    Hilarious sidenote regarding Event 201 and Covid-19. Here's the USAToday's attempt to debunk that Event 201 had anything to do with Covid-19.

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...19/5081854002/

    As the COVID-19 pandemic disrupts the globe, rumors abound online about the origin of the virus. On March 16, @freedom_faction posted an image on Instagram along with the claim that "COVID-19 was launched" a month after billionaire Bill Gates hosted a "high-level pandemic exercise" event.

    "#BillGates hosted a closed-door meeting for global elites and the invitation came with a #COVID19 #coronavirus plush toy, a few months later thousands would be dead," the post reads.

    "The participants of Event 201, invited there by the rich and powerful elites that rule the world, sat and war-gamed how an outbreak of COVID-19 coronavirus might go," @freedom_faction also wrote in the post. "Looks like the meeting was a success because just one month to the day later, the first case of COVID-19 was reported in China, and well, you know the rest."

    The Instagram post cites a Johns Hopkins University pandemic preparedness simulation known as Event 201 as the scene. "Of course, it was invitation only, and held behind closed doors," the post reads.

    Although Event 201 was a real operation, there is no evidence that it was meant to model or engineer the current COVID-19 pandemic.
    Event 201 and pandemic preparation

    Event 201 was a tabletop exercise that simulated a global pandemic, which resulted from a new coronavirus. The program was hosted in October by the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security in partnership with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and World Economic Forum.

    The invite-only event featured medical professionals, policy experts and business analysts all focused on how different institutions would respond to the onset of a deadly virus. The fictional coronavirus — a coronavirus, in general, being a specific kind of virus — in the scenario killed 65 million people over 18 months. Joint recommendations from participants urged international cooperation both in preparing for and handling a pandemic.
    Such crazy talk from crazy people because, you know, they didn't call it Covid-19 during Event 201. Therefore not related and most definitely not planned. Everything else fits but THEY DIDN'T CALL IT COVID-19 SO IT'S CRAZY TALK.
    Last edited by devil21; 05-27-2020 at 11:33 PM.
    "Let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    The entire internet is the domain of paid shills and bots. If you don't know this by now....

    Israel, under control of the Crown and, ultimately, the Vatican, own the USA. If you don't know this by now....

    Talk to people about liberty. You won't find it on websites, you won't find it in politicians.

    But now you can't talk to people because of "social distancing"....brought to you by shills and politicians.



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by devil21 View Post
    This is actually backdoor legislation to allow lawsuits against websites like RPF, where inconvenient speech is still allowed and not (usually) censored. Currently, RPF can't be sued for the content posted on the site and maintains immunity under the same section 230.
    Curious if this is true, @Brian4Liberty?

    The content here is moderated and there is a mission statement and guidelines that posters must follow.

    Moderators taking reasonable action to delete posts for which the site can be held liable.

    I'm not sure this site fits in the same category as facebook or twitter, I always assumed it did not.
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
    "You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
    "When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q

    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

  30. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by Created4 View Post
    Certainly possible. And don't think I don't know this already.

    All eyes will be on Alex Jones, because he is the first one they will take down.
    Again, I don't think AJs site falls under the same category as facebook and twitter, either..

    For example, AJ has been sued multiple times over content on his website... which to me, says he is already liable for his content.. so what exactly would be changing for him?
    Last edited by dannno; 05-27-2020 at 11:45 PM.
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
    "You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
    "When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q

    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

  31. #27
    I do think more has to be done to protect our rights online, we're in danger of a permanent technological dictatorship if this is allowed to continue.

  32. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    Curious if this is true, @Brian4Liberty?

    The content here is moderated and there is a mission statement and guidelines that posters must follow.

    Moderators taking reasonable action to delete posts for which the site can be held liable.

    I'm not sure this site fits in the same category as facebook or twitter, I always assumed it did not.
    It all depends on how they define "social media" in the legislation. I think it's obvious that RPF would qualify as "social media". The word "media" doesn't exclusively mean media in the sense of how CNN, Fox, etc are "media".

    https://www.dictionary.com/browse/media

    1. a plural of medium. (d21: social mediums....mediums for people to be social with each other)
    2. (usually used with a plural verb) the means of communication, as radio and television, newspapers, magazines, and the Internet, that reach or influence people widely

    Medium:
    1. an intervening agency, means, or instrument by which something is conveyed or accomplished: Words are a medium of expression.
    2. one of the means or channels of general communication, information, or entertainment in society, as newspapers, radio, or television.
    "Let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    The entire internet is the domain of paid shills and bots. If you don't know this by now....

    Israel, under control of the Crown and, ultimately, the Vatican, own the USA. If you don't know this by now....

    Talk to people about liberty. You won't find it on websites, you won't find it in politicians.

    But now you can't talk to people because of "social distancing"....brought to you by shills and politicians.

  33. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by devil21 View Post
    It all depends on how they define "social media" in the legislation. I think it's obvious that RPF would qualify as "social media". The word "media" doesn't exclusively mean media in the sense of how CNN, Fox, etc are "media".

    https://www.dictionary.com/browse/media

    1. a plural of medium. (d21: social mediums....mediums for people to be social with each other)
    2. (usually used with a plural verb) the means of communication, as radio and television, newspapers, magazines, and the Internet, that reach or influence people widely

    Medium:
    1. an intervening agency, means, or instrument by which something is conveyed or accomplished: Words are a medium of expression.
    2. one of the means or channels of general communication, information, or entertainment in society, as newspapers, radio, or television.
    What are you talking about?

    You don't seem to understand the basic premise here.

    There are two kinds of websites. One kind of website assumes editorial control, and is ALREADY liable for content posted - I.e. infowars, CNN, Fox News and, I assumed, this website. Therefore nothing will change for them, because that is already how it is.

    The second kind of website is like twitter or facebook - they have been allowed to skirt the liability laws because they claim they don't have editorial control over the content of their site. The whole idea is that since they are now choosing to assume editorial control over their content, they should already be held liable, based on the current laws - I'm not saying that is how it should be, just that is how current laws seem to be put together.

    To me, this EO seems like it pretty much just defines the law as it already is, by making clear that since these sites are assuming editorial control over their content they would be held liable for what is posted there.. just like, I presume this website would be. So it would put them on equal footing with this website, or infowars, etc.

    There may even be something in the EO that would allow these websites to continue to operate liability free - if only they decided to reverse course and not exercise editorial control over the site. It could very well be that this EO is simply a directive to follow the current laws that are already on the books.
    Last edited by dannno; 05-28-2020 at 12:06 AM.
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
    "You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
    "When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q

    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

  34. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    Again, I don't think AJs site falls under the same category as facebook and twitter, either..

    For example, AJ has been sued multiple times over content on his website... which to me, says he is already liable for his content.. so what exactly would be changing for him?
    Its not because this is a predicted assumed and inferred interpretation of the executive order because there has been no text or information released about it other than a tweet. Its literally assuming the worst with no information. Trump has never said he would do anything about changing or getting rid of section 230 otherwise they would of posted it.

Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-24-2017, 01:27 AM
  2. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 11-23-2014, 04:54 PM
  3. Obama Threatens "Executive Order" on GUNS
    By presence in forum Second Amendment
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-09-2013, 10:51 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-24-2010, 06:10 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •