Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I am, I just have a different opinion than you. You're claiming that Twitter is forcing people to accept something. That's not possible. You're saying that they have the ability to shape discussion. That's permissible as it's their platform. Twitter doesn't abandon their rights to their platform.Does Twitter not have a right to express speech? What’s so bad with editorializing?It has everything to do with Trump. Where do you think this all came from?you keep pushing trump off on me as if he has shit to do with my point.So what then. Use government to harass private companies to help Trump?nope. most he can do is get the FCC to investigate them and be a PITA. unfortunately both sides are being a PITA and pushing this as far as they can go.Nope. The language of the law is extremely basic and clear. Trump cannot rewrite law by executive order.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.We do need changes - The executive order is making it quite clear that they are now a content provider.
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.
the gov is going to win. twitter is going to have to play by the US rules in as much as any other country they choose to be in. you think China doesn't control shit on twitter?
we need to have our laws force social media to be one or the other designation but not both.
Sounds like abuse of power.
since you are not even trying to have an open conversation where what *I* say counts vs what you want to argue with, bye.
Later snowflake. Let me know when you grow a spine.
The problem does not lie with Trump. He was just the one that was the receiver on the first Twitter play. The problem is in Twitter overstepping their boundaries and editorializing If you don't see a problem with that then you will when you see some horseshit you disagree with thrown your way on Twitter.
Because you are letting a Private (publicly owned) company dictate what is misleading and untruthful. They then get the green light to shape the discussion. You don't see a problem with that? Jeebus, how many times have the liberals complained about companies making political donations? That's very weak compared to shaping the conversation.
Twitter is all about fact checking. Don't know if you've been there (obviously not) but if you post something that is slightly off you will hear about it. To the nth degree. The public does a much better job and keeps companies out of the conversation.
A private (publicly owned) company is entitled to free speech, are they not? Twitter is using that free speech to give their opinion. They aren't dictating anything to anyone. You're welcome to believe their opinion or not.
Why are you so threatened by Twitter's engaging in free speech?
You aren't reading what I'm posting - I'm done with this conversation with you.
It is entirely clear to me that you do not see the bigger picture, so I will just let you blabber on.It's not your job to tell Twitter what their job is. Twitter is not forcing anyone to believe anything. If you want to sue Twitter for the content of their speech as libelous, go right ahead, although opinion is specifically exempted from those laws.
This is an attempt to silence Twitter for political purposes. That's a big problem. If we let government do this, we're all fucked of our freedom of thought and expression.
Then, those bastards are now PUBLISHERS, not a platform.If you want to engage in political speech, that's you're right. But you have no right to demand social media or anyone else propagate that speech.
"230 content" is a meaningless phrase.
You can't goose-step both ways, commie.
.
Let them do it, and they lose their protection, and millions of people.Twitter could just ban him from the platform for attacking the moderation and management of the board. Very much within their rights to do that.Long video, but very interesting details provided.
Will it work?
I only see two likely ways this could play out:
1. Twitter/Facebook et al could just accept their status as publishers and start banning more people/speech and further demonstrate their left-wing bias, which could lead to a mass exodus or boycott, including losses of advertising used to support their businesses.
2. They could stop acting like brown shirts or Heinrich Himmler and the SS, and only edit content under 230 (as will need to be clearly defined by the FCC or whomever) and they get to continue as mere platforms with 230 protections.
I am interested in how this will affect Google, given their seriously-troubling search content editing and manipulation. They have the most to lose by this, and their actions are clearly demonstrable.
.
They delete things from the right because they are lies, not because they disagree.Twitter removes an enormous amount of tweets for being hateful. No one removed Trump’s lying tweet. They just posted a link below it stating why they thought it wasn’t true. What’s ironic is that you’re all outraged that Twitter is using their freedom of expression to reply to Trump’s tweet.If your side wasn't posting so many lies and so much hate they wouldn't be getting banned.The argument is Twitter owns this site to Twitter can do what the fuck they want.The rationale for public accommodation laws does not apply to social media websites.So legislation has nothing to do with other legislation built off the same premise?This has nothing to do with thatLike what LGBTQRSTUVs do with bakeries? Intimidate them like the thugs they are?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.
Lol ok
This is not the same premise.
That argument doesn't also apply to other businesses wanting to do what they want?
Just like every other commie leftist out there, you have played both sides of the issue. How perfect.
.
Every business retains the right to toss out people based on a multitude of factors, especially individual behavior. That’s no different than what Twitter is doing. People have attempted to sue Twitter on grounds of title 2 of the Civil Rights Act and I believe they’ve always failed.
The only reason you support twitter in this is you know they only seem to gun for views you disagree with.
Fucking fascist.
Follow the rules.
Yes, because progressive losers like you never post "hateful" or "lying" tweets.
Fuck off.
Fascist.
They claim to be an open forum, accepting all viewpoints, and yet the only viewpoints they seem to delete with any consistency are those from the right.
If they want to take a side, they should have to say it, in writing. If they want to be a forum for open exchange they shouldn't be banning people for content based on their politics.
I am, I just have a different opinion than you. You're claiming that Twitter is forcing people to accept something. That's not possible. You're saying that they have the ability to shape discussion. That's permissible as it's their platform. Twitter doesn't abandon their rights to their platform.
That's a post in search of an argument. You might as well head to another thread.View attachment 342177
All of your posts are hyper-partisan. Let's not pretend for a single-second that if someone from your party had the reins of power, you wouldn't celebrate the same action as social justice.
No - you have to apply and agree to terms of use.Those terms constitute censorship (by their own definition).That is correct. There are terms of use with every discussion group.Go to r/conservative and you’ll get kicked off just as quick.I'm not a conservative [I do have conservative leanings] and I've never been banned from anywhere but my post was in reference to "legalities" within the law, I know that may not be obvious from my post but the post was just off the cuff and not intended to be anything more than some clarity regarding that [it certainly was not meant to be the "end all be all" definition of trump or twitters behavior]... and censorship even of the "acceptable and legal" variety" is still censorship... fighting censorship in all its forms was once a great source of pride for Democrats, it is now just another weapon used against America by white liberals who pretend they are defenders of our constitution.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.
go to r/politics on redit. Post something that disagrees in a very gentle way and see how long you last. I was kicked within five minutes.
No they don't - they are private groups and if you want to belong you have to go by the rules. I don't think churches would let someone into the church to get up on the altar and preach about how good Satan is, now would they.
I'm not required to let someone in on my block party if I don't like them, now do I.
Completely different. Doesn't equate to a platform provider.
They are not private groups by any definition. Anyone can make an account and post in that subreddit. But they will be censored almost immediately for having the wrong opinion.
Guess you haven't been there.
I looked but I couldn't find where twitter was receiving federal funding.to receive federal funding they had to sign a non discrimination agreement and a they can't take political sides agreement?
Of course you are a liar as always. When you link to CNN and start labeling things false or misleading, you are a content provider. That is a FACT. As always, they destroy you.That is without a doubt completely untrue.OF course the usual leftard suspects miss the obvious. Once you start censoring content or doing what the biased Twitter nuts are doing, you are now a content provider. That means you are now subject to libel laws.
It's pretty clear:
No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider
That's the law
Fuck that. GOOD!!!Not according to current law. You don't want to treat social media as publishers. It will destroy them. Then you'd ruin it for everyone.
But, Obama!Obama twists the law into a pretzel to authorize the FBI to spy on President Trump and his family. Democrats say "COOL!" President Trump signs an EO to call out obviously partisan social media platforms for selective harassment and censorship and Democrats squeal like stuck pigs.
Another one who would love to debate something and never will.
It is entirely clear to me that you do not see the bigger picture, so I will just let you blabber on.It's not your job to tell Twitter what their job is. Twitter is not forcing anyone to believe anything. If you want to sue Twitter for the content of their speech as libelous, go right ahead, although opinion is specifically exempted from those laws.
This is an attempt to silence Twitter for political purposes. That's a big problem. If we let government do this, we're all fucked of our freedom of thought and expression.
.
Even if that were true (it's not) it is EDITORIALIZING!!! That is NOT 230 content they are allowed to delete.They delete things from the right because they are lies, not because they disagree.
Who ruined it? The snowflakes that think it's their right to post someone else's platform. You're essentially demanding that you have access to someone else's property. That's a lot more commie than what I'm saying.Fuck that. GOOD!!!Not according to current law. You don't want to treat social media as publishers. It will destroy them. Then you'd ruin it for everyone.
Who ruined it? The people speaking freely or the assholes trying to shape public opinions by editorializing the content?
Commies gonna commie.
.
What law would that be? I only know of the one's he's broken.So glad you finally care about presidents abusing their power now. The donald really turned you leftist hacks into upholders of the law.
I love it!
Which is a clear violation of the first amendment.You’re supporting a government action for force Twitter to support your dear leader.And you’re a fascist thug. Nice to meet you.Twitter removes an enormous amount of tweets for being hateful. No one removed Trump’s lying tweet. They just posted a link below it stating why they thought it wasn’t true. What’s ironic is that you’re all outraged that Twitter is using their freedom of expression to reply to Trump’s tweet.If your side wasn't posting so many lies and so much hate they wouldn't be getting banned.The argument is Twitter owns this site to Twitter can do what the fuck they want.The rationale for public accommodation laws does not apply to social media websites.So legislation has nothing to do with other legislation built off the same premise?This has nothing to do with thatLike what LGBTQRSTUVs do with bakeries? Intimidate them like the thugs they are?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.
Lol ok
This is not the same premise.
That argument doesn't also apply to other businesses wanting to do what they want?
Just like every other commie leftist out there, you have played both sides of the issue. How perfect.
.
Every business retains the right to toss out people based on a multitude of factors, especially individual behavior. That’s no different than what Twitter is doing. People have attempted to sue Twitter on grounds of title 2 of the Civil Rights Act and I believe they’ve always failed.
The only reason you support twitter in this is you know they only seem to gun for views you disagree with.
Fucking fascist.
Follow the rules.
Yes, because progressive losers like you never post "hateful" or "lying" tweets.
Fuck off.
Fascist.
They claim to be an open forum, accepting all viewpoints, and yet the only viewpoints they seem to delete with any consistency are those from the right.
If they want to take a side, they should have to say it, in writing. If they want to be a forum for open exchange they shouldn't be banning people for content based on their politics.
Twitter has never stated there are no limits to what you can post. You’re either lying or just making shut up.
Being an open forum and having no limits on what you can post are two different things, and you know that.
Twitter's own missions statement:
Twitter's purpose is to serve the public conversation. Violence, harassment and other similar types of behavior discourage people from expressing themselves, and ultimately diminish the value of global public conversation. Our rules are to ensure all people can participate in the public conversation freely and safely.
As their statement says, moderation is essential to keeping the platform viable.
That’s precisely why they wrote section 230 in the first place. That’s why these websites even exist.
"Moderation".
So that's how you explain content based bans and filtering.
Uh, yes. That’s exactly what it means. If someone posts something with content that is unacceptable, the moderators remove it. It’s how it works on this forum too.
And of course, to you, unacceptable means "anything I disagree with politically"
Just admit it, you favor banning speech of people you don't like.
Twitter has a ton of speech on it that I disagree with. I have no desire to see it banned.
Have you ever seen a platform with the lack of moderation that you desire? They’re cesspools of racism, anti-semitism and generally fringe nonsense. No one wants that.
Bullshit.
You are a censoring lying twat. FOAD.
Twitter has no obligation to pay to propagate idiots speech.
What am i doing to stop you from spreading your idiocy?
Twitter claims to be a discussion forum, and then takes sides in the discussion.
You don't care because it takes your side, filth.
