GOP working on legislation to strip Twitter of federal liability protections

[OldLady]

Section 230 protects social media platforms from facing lawsuits over what users post.

If this goes through I'll initially set the over-under percentage of users banned here at USMB at 50%. Too low? Too High?

We're all anonymous. Who is going to sue USMB?

Anyone who feels that any poster has defamed them.

NO ONE KNOWS WHO WE ARE.

 

[Ken Mac]

so, is it okay for the govt to tell the USMB Moderators and site owners what rules they make for this site or to hold USMB owners libel for what their posters, post?

They won't since this forum is a PLATFORM, Mods delete when certain debate rules are violated. I had THREE postings deleted (Reported them) yesterday because it violated the forum rule of attacking family members (No Attacks on family members) , my wife in this case, he was very insulting and completely off topic.

Moderators can delete or ban or permaban any message or members they want on USMB, at their discretion....it does not have to break the rules....

..............................................

Did Trump's tweet, violate twitter's rules, as they claim??

But they aren't publishing inside, against your comments. They react to rule breaking nothing more.

You ignored post 95 that explains why Twitter made a huge mistake in their reaction to one of his NON Rule breaking comments.

HAVENT READ 95 YET, but the news reported that the tweet of trump's did break their rules?

my problem is why haven't they corrected or added information to ALL of his fake news and lies? Or ban him for his lies and threats before?

Because they would have to act accordingly for all the other twitter users who provide misleading information. That is about 99% of all twitter users. Twitter would no longer exist as a company.

 

[iceberg]

Gaetz is virtue signaling. His little hissy fit has no chance at doing anything.

Second, if his bill did pass, the result would be the immediate removal of Trump from the platform.

The sole intention of this episode is to intimidate Twitter like the thugs they are.

you lose a lot of cred if you say twitter is being pushed around. they either allow open communication on their platform, trump included, or they choose to edit trump and then they are responsible for ALL content in the same manner as other publishers are.

having the best of both worlds isn't a solution that works for all. trying to portray people tired of being censured as "thugs" is self serving and not seeing the issue for what it is.

when you grow up enough, the rules you have to go by change. its how corporations grow up. i watched microsoft do it from inside the company and they one day got big enough to where what they did yesterday was illegal today; so to speak. so they had to alter and change and play by new rules.

to think social media isn't subject to these same rules, frankly, is bullshit.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

Twitter owns the site, they can regulate content

If they do, then they become a publisher, and they can be sued.

Exactly. Twitter and the like have no liability because they are just an engine where people express their opinions. The minute the publish their own opinions the are now a publisher and are liable.

 

[Ken Mac]

We do need changes - The executive order is making it quite clear that they are now a content provider.

The executive order can not rewrite legislation. Twitter is not liable for the content of their users. If they were, Trump would be kicked off immediately.

THEY can be held LIABLE because the just opened up the Pandoras box by editorializing. They are now a content provider not a content platform. They now will have to police the whole twitter universe. You know that isn't gonna happen.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

Actually, they can be as biased as they wish
If they want a site that is far left or far right, they can act accordingly.

Well yeah, admitting that the bias exists changes the dynamic and allows what was a lie to become mere opinion

Nobody says life is fair

Yes, I think I remember you making that very same claim to defend hobby lobby and the baker against those who claimed they were being biased.

 

[meaner gene]

It is a little known concept for libtards called "freedom of speech"!

You mean "freedom of HATE speech" and lies?

Even hate speech is protected by the first amendment (at least by the government) What twitter did is the core of how the founding fathers saw the 1st amendment. It wasn't to stop bad ideas, but to guarantee people could put better ideas into the conversation.

 

[BrokeLoser]

We are in the midst of a pandemic. The U.S. has nearly a third of the world's confirmed cases. The U.S. has nearly a third of the world's deaths from the virus. What is our President doing? He is attacking Twitter.

He has the temperament of a child. His self esteem is so brittle that he can't rise above anything.

But far worse, those who refuse to hold him accountable for anything only enable more of this kind of behavior.

"Accountable" for Making America American again?
Accountable for delivering on promises he made?
Accountable for restoring American virtue?
Accountable for refusing to govern on behalf of the filthy pieces of shit among us?
Accountable for getting blacks to lace up work boots?
Accountable for a booming stock market?
Accountable for improving the quality of life for good real Americans?
Accountable for making wetbacks feel unwanted and for shutting down our ******* border?

I think we do hold him accountable. Why don't you?

 

[Ken Mac]

but there has to be an SOP of even handedness for it to be legal,

I've heard plenty of conservatives here say that they've been banned from this and that site for being conservatives. Why is it legal for those sites but not for Twitter? I don't understand.

Because "THOSE" sites put up strict rules that create "safe space bubbles" in which people can interact in a friendly non-confrontational way. Posting "Misleading" information or information that is in opposition to ones view is not in the terms of use contract on Twitter. If it were - they would have to ban about 99% of the users. They ain't gonna do that because then there would be no twitter. Confrontation is Twitter's bread and butter and they just made a shit sandwich. Ewwwww.

 

[colfax_m]

Gaetz is virtue signaling. His little hissy fit has no chance at doing anything.

Second, if his bill did pass, the result would be the immediate removal of Trump from the platform.

The sole intention of this episode is to intimidate Twitter like the thugs they are.

you lose a lot of cred if you say twitter is being pushed around. they either allow open communication on their platform, trump included, or they choose to edit trump and then they are responsible for ALL content in the same manner as other publishers are.

having the best of both worlds isn't a solution that works for all. trying to portray people tired of being censured as "thugs" is self serving and not seeing the issue for what it is.

when you grow up enough, the rules you have to go by change. its how corporations grow up. i watched microsoft do it from inside the company and they one day got big enough to where what they did yesterday was illegal today; so to speak. so they had to alter and change and play by new rules.

to think social media isn't subject to these same rules, frankly, is bullshit.

You don’t know what you’re asking for. You will break the internet by getting what you’re asking for.

For starters, no one edited Trump.

Internet companies need protection from liability now more than ever given the massive volume of posts. Without this protection, Twitter wouldn’t exist in the first place.

 

[iceberg]

but there has to be an SOP of even handedness for it to be legal,

I've heard plenty of conservatives here say that they've been banned from this and that site for being conservatives. Why is it legal for those sites but not for Twitter? I don't understand.

depends on the site and why. if a private site, up to whoever owns it. if USMB decided they didn't want me here, they can ban me and be done with it.

i can get mad, i can scream but that would be about it.

most sites that ban you are small sites no one really cares about. when our way of life revolves around these "social sites" you hit a point where the freedoms you enjoyed as a "child" don't apply anymore.

you have to "grow up" too.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

TDS thread 1,636

I'll have to update my count. I had 1,632. Thanks!

 

[colfax_m]

We do need changes - The executive order is making it quite clear that they are now a content provider.

The executive order can not rewrite legislation. Twitter is not liable for the content of their users. If they were, Trump would be kicked off immediately.

THEY can be held LIABLE because the just opened up the Pandoras box by editorializing. They are now a content provider not a content platform. They now will have to police the whole twitter universe. You know that isn't gonna happen.

Nope. The language of the law is extremely basic and clear. Trump cannot rewrite law by executive order.

 

[Ken Mac]

Gaetz is virtue signaling. His little hissy fit has no chance at doing anything.

Second, if his bill did pass, the result would be the immediate removal of Trump from the platform.

The sole intention of this episode is to intimidate Twitter like the thugs they are.

you lose a lot of cred if you say twitter is being pushed around. they either allow open communication on their platform, trump included, or they choose to edit trump and then they are responsible for ALL content in the same manner as other publishers are.

having the best of both worlds isn't a solution that works for all. trying to portray people tired of being censured as "thugs" is self serving and not seeing the issue for what it is.

when you grow up enough, the rules you have to go by change. its how corporations grow up. i watched microsoft do it from inside the company and they one day got big enough to where what they did yesterday was illegal today; so to speak. so they had to alter and change and play by new rules.

to think social media isn't subject to these same rules, frankly, is bullshit.

You don’t know what you’re asking for. You will break the internet by getting what you’re asking for.

For starters, no one edited Trump.

Internet companies need protection from liability now more than ever given the massive volume of posts. Without this protection, Twitter wouldn’t exist in the first place.

They are protected for christ's sake. That is what 230 is all about! They just jumped the shark and took a new route which wasn't allowed. So now - THEY opened themselves up to liable. Sorry you don't understand that.

 

[colfax_m]

Gaetz is virtue signaling. His little hissy fit has no chance at doing anything.

Second, if his bill did pass, the result would be the immediate removal of Trump from the platform.

The sole intention of this episode is to intimidate Twitter like the thugs they are.

you lose a lot of cred if you say twitter is being pushed around. they either allow open communication on their platform, trump included, or they choose to edit trump and then they are responsible for ALL content in the same manner as other publishers are.

having the best of both worlds isn't a solution that works for all. trying to portray people tired of being censured as "thugs" is self serving and not seeing the issue for what it is.

when you grow up enough, the rules you have to go by change. its how corporations grow up. i watched microsoft do it from inside the company and they one day got big enough to where what they did yesterday was illegal today; so to speak. so they had to alter and change and play by new rules.

to think social media isn't subject to these same rules, frankly, is bullshit.

You don’t know what you’re asking for. You will break the internet by getting what you’re asking for.

For starters, no one edited Trump.

Internet companies need protection from liability now more than ever given the massive volume of posts. Without this protection, Twitter wouldn’t exist in the first place.

They are protected for christ's sake. That is what 230 is all about! They just jumped the shark and took a new route which wasn't allowed. So now - THEY opened themselves up to liable. Sorry you don't understand that.

There is no legal grounds to say that what they did “isn’t allowed”.

 

[Ken Mac]

We do need changes - The executive order is making it quite clear that they are now a content provider.

The executive order can not rewrite legislation. Twitter is not liable for the content of their users. If they were, Trump would be kicked off immediately.

THEY can be held LIABLE because the just opened up the Pandoras box by editorializing. They are now a content provider not a content platform. They now will have to police the whole twitter universe. You know that isn't gonna happen.

Nope. The language of the law is extremely basic and clear. Trump cannot rewrite law by executive order.

I NEVER said he is changing the language of the law. But please do understand, the executive order ISN"T needed to begin to hold Twitter liable for content on their platform. All they need to do is start editorializing and acting as publisher. They did that. It's a done deal. They need to back off or they will be ******* themselves.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

“Found a way”? Twitter didn’t just happen naturally. It’s the product of years or hard work and a huge success story.

and yet you are confused that trump has "found a way" to deliver his message unfiltered.

Trump is just using the work of others to suit his own purposes and threatening them for not acquiescing to his demands.

Ya know, when you look at things through a media mirror they seem to be exactly the same as the image they reflect but in reality they are exactly the opposite...Trump is the one who is not acquiescing and it is white liberals demanding that he does and irate because he refuses.

 

[Ken Mac]

Gaetz is virtue signaling. His little hissy fit has no chance at doing anything.

Second, if his bill did pass, the result would be the immediate removal of Trump from the platform.

The sole intention of this episode is to intimidate Twitter like the thugs they are.

you lose a lot of cred if you say twitter is being pushed around. they either allow open communication on their platform, trump included, or they choose to edit trump and then they are responsible for ALL content in the same manner as other publishers are.

having the best of both worlds isn't a solution that works for all. trying to portray people tired of being censured as "thugs" is self serving and not seeing the issue for what it is.

when you grow up enough, the rules you have to go by change. its how corporations grow up. i watched microsoft do it from inside the company and they one day got big enough to where what they did yesterday was illegal today; so to speak. so they had to alter and change and play by new rules.

to think social media isn't subject to these same rules, frankly, is bullshit.

You don’t know what you’re asking for. You will break the internet by getting what you’re asking for.

For starters, no one edited Trump.

Internet companies need protection from liability now more than ever given the massive volume of posts. Without this protection, Twitter wouldn’t exist in the first place.

They are protected for christ's sake. That is what 230 is all about! They just jumped the shark and took a new route which wasn't allowed. So now - THEY opened themselves up to liable. Sorry you don't understand that.

There is no legal grounds to say that what they did “isn’t allowed”.

You still don't get it. Maybe go read 230.

And where did I say "Legal" or "legal grounds"? I never used the term. I said "LIABLE" Read FFS. I know you're smarter than that.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

Hmm....So you now support elected officials using their office to punish their perceived political enemies? Curious.

The only thing 'curious' is how you got the ridiculous bullshit you wrote above from Republicans taking action to protect / defend Free Speech and ensure the govt does not offer protection from accountability to private companies attempting to prevent the equal /fair exchange of ideas and discussion.

Oh wait - it's not curious at all. It all makes sense:

View attachment 342108

Sure. Protect the "free speech" of the president.

It is curious that you either don't see it or you're fine with it. Curious because you lost your shit when you thought Obama did that with the IRS. You're still losing your shit over Obamagate.
Yet here you are cheering for legislstors to change laws for no other reason than to accomodate the president while at the same time, punishing his enemies.

View attachment 342145

You're comparing apples and oranges. However if you do want to compare the two... Obama weaponized the IRS against people who opposed him namely conservatives by auditing them just because of who they were and Twitter apparently wants to be weaponized against the same people namely conservatives. Sounds like there's some cultural discrimination going on there.

Are you saying that liberal posters won't be able to post if this goes through? I seriously doubt that might happen.

*****CHUCKLE******

Are you saying that liberal posters won't be able to post if this goes through? I seriously doubt that might happen.

I'm not saying that at all, dope.
Re-read your own post and see if you can find the flaws in your logic.

I see no flaws in my logic.

I'm just here for the turkey shoot.

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[colfax_m]

We do need changes - The executive order is making it quite clear that they are now a content provider.

The executive order can not rewrite legislation. Twitter is not liable for the content of their users. If they were, Trump would be kicked off immediately.

THEY can be held LIABLE because the just opened up the Pandoras box by editorializing. They are now a content provider not a content platform. They now will have to police the whole twitter universe. You know that isn't gonna happen.

Nope. The language of the law is extremely basic and clear. Trump cannot rewrite law by executive order.

I NEVER said he is changing the language of the law. But please do understand, the executive order ISN"T needed to begin to hold Twitter liable for content on their platform. All they need to do is start editorializing and acting as publisher. They did that. It's a done deal. They need to back off or they will be ******* themselves.

Trump nor anyone can treat Twitter like a publisher of user content without a change in current law.

Not happening anytime soon.