Marco Rubio Warns Twitter

[hadit]

Ah, yes, the old "implicit threats". Let us know when he actually tries to do it.

Why? So you can twist yourself into an embarrassing little pretzel of fallacies to defend that, too?

No, because it's meaningless until he tries to take action. Also, I thought the thread was about what Rubio said, not Trump.

 

[Dr Grump]

This is why we need to keep Trump in the White House 4 more years.

Rubio warns Twitter after it puts fact-check label on Trump tweet

Sen. Marco Rubio fired a warning shot at Twitter after it appended a fact-check label to President Trump’s tweets about mail-in voting. The Florida Republican said Tuesday that Twitter “should no longer be shielded from liability” and treated as a publisher if it decides to deviate from its...

www.google.com

NOW THIS ^^^^^^ This is where I start to agree with some of the right-wingers saying we need to put liability on these tech companies.

You can delete whatever you want on your site.... that doesn't bother me as much honestly. I'll just go somewhere else.

However... when you start making judgement calls about what I post on your site? No, that doesn't work. Now you are making value judgements on what I post. Now I should be able to sue the crap out of you.

You want to ban me, that's fine, I'll go someplace else, and talk bad about your platform, while promoting the platform I'm on. We'll run you out of business.

But if you are going to start trying to say I can talk on your site, but you'll just claim everything I say has been proven false, or is questionable.... I'm going to sue the crap out of you. That's not how this works.

Rubio is dead on right. People like him, are exactly why I support Republicans.

Huh? Why would you sue and what would you sue for? And just so you know, if Trump was to sue because they said his tweets were questionable, he would lose.

 

[airplanemechanic]

That could be characterized as interference with the American political process.

Yeah, God forbid we stop the President from broadcasting bullshit lies about Democrats. How unAmerican.

As long as they stop liberal rags from posting lies about Trump.

Oh yea, they're not doing that.

I heard a great analogy today. Twitter is like the phone company. They might own the servers and such, but they don't own the right to tell you what to say on it. The phone company owns the wires, the phone lines, the switchboards, etc but they have no right to dictate what you say while using their equipment.

 

[Dr Grump]

That could be characterized as interference with the American political process.

Yeah, God forbid we stop the President from broadcasting bullshit lies about Democrats. How unAmerican.

As long as they stop liberal rags from posting lies about Trump.

Oh yea, they're not doing that.

I heard a great analogy today. Twitter is like the phone company. They might own the servers and such, but they don't own the right to tell you what to say on it. The phone company owns the wires, the phone lines, the switchboards, etc but they have no right to dictate what you say while using their equipment.

Yeah they do. It's like a newspaper. They have the right to publish or not publish something. Now, once you have the newspaper in your hand you can wipe your arse with it for all I care. However, being a digital platform they can do what the fuck they want. They can even ban Trump if they want to. It's their platform. A telephone company can tell you to fuck off too.

 

[Papageorgio]

Republicans fight to the death for the right to spread misinformation

Is it free speech or not?

Who gets to be the arbiters of truth in an open forum of ideas?

Now, I don't want government to regulate private social media, but to say that slapping a label on the content of a tweet from the sitting POTUS is not political activity is a load of horse shit. That could be characterized as interference with the American political process.

.

First Amendment.......
Congress shall pass no laws....

Applies to Government restricting free speech. Twitter is a private company and can set its own rules of behavior on its site. Kind of what USMB does

No one is asking Twitter to stop posting or allow others to post.The law that Rubio was passed years ago, no one is passing a law. What is being done is reclassifying from a social media outlet that allows a forum to voice opinions to a being a publisher that adds commentary to post, which could make them liable for what is said.

Twitter needs to decide what they want to be, a social media forum or a publisher.

 

[Papageorgio]

This is why we need to keep Trump in the White House 4 more years.

Rubio warns Twitter after it puts fact-check label on Trump tweet

Sen. Marco Rubio fired a warning shot at Twitter after it appended a fact-check label to President Trump’s tweets about mail-in voting. The Florida Republican said Tuesday that Twitter “should no longer be shielded from liability” and treated as a publisher if it decides to deviate from its...

www.google.com

Marco Rubio is a pussy. Republicans may want to end free speech, but they will fail as they always do.

In a leftist world, enforcing free speech is ending it.

Yes forcing federal control onto a private company's speech is so free. Fuck you, snowflake.

That isn’t what they are doing, it is reclassifying Twitter as a publisher and not a social media forum. Big difference.

 

[Papageorgio]

Republicans fight to the death for the right to spread misinformation

An extremely large percentage of political speech is misinformation. Are you arguing that the government should have the power to shut it down?

If Trump is unhappy with the rules of conduct on Twitter, he can take his business elsewhere

Do you not join in the fight for the right to say what you want to say, whether it's right or wrong? It would seem to me that freedom covers both.

Twitter has a right to establish rules for what can be posted

If Trump wants to post any lies he wants, he can sign up for USMB

Depends on what Twitter wants, they are a social media platform and have a right to ban people decide what content they want. What they did was become a publisher by posting commentary by posts or rate them. They have a right to be a publisher however that legally opens up them for potential libel.

 

[Papageorgio]

That could be characterized as interference with the American political process.

Yeah, God forbid we stop the President from broadcasting bullshit lies about Democrats. How unAmerican.

As long as they stop liberal rags from posting lies about Trump.

Oh yea, they're not doing that.

I heard a great analogy today. Twitter is like the phone company. They might own the servers and such, but they don't own the right to tell you what to say on it. The phone company owns the wires, the phone lines, the switchboards, etc but they have no right to dictate what you say while using their equipment.

Yeah they do. It's like a newspaper. They have the right to publish or not publish something. Now, once you have the newspaper in your hand you can wipe your arse with it for all I care. However, being a digital platform they can do what the fuck they want. They can even ban Trump if they want to. It's their platform. A telephone company can tell you to fuck off too.

They have a right to publish however they would be reclassified as a publisher and then become libel for their content, not just what a politicians but everyone.

 

[WEATHER53]

Liberal used to be all views and now it’s one view.

 

[Dr Grump]

They have a right to publish however they would be reclassified as a publisher and then become libel for their content, not just what a politicians but everyone.

They are liable for their content and users can be sued for libel/defamation. James Woods was sued. Hollywood Docket: James Woods' Twitter Defamation Win Upheld by Appeals Court

 

[Dr Grump]

Depends on what Twitter wants, they are a social media platform and have a right to ban people decide what content they want. What they did was become a publisher by posting commentary by posts or rate them. They have a right to be a publisher however that legally opens up them for potential libel.

Exactly. But they haven't done anything libelous...

 

[Roudy]

This is why we need to keep Trump in the White House 4 more years.

Rubio warns Twitter after it puts fact-check label on Trump tweet

Sen. Marco Rubio fired a warning shot at Twitter after it appended a fact-check label to President Trump’s tweets about mail-in voting. The Florida Republican said Tuesday that Twitter “should no longer be shielded from liability” and treated as a publisher if it decides to deviate from its...

www.google.com

Twitter should be very stupido to fuck with the goose that lays golden eggs for them, and hundreds of millions of followers, President Donald Trump.

 

[Aletheia4u]

This is why we need to keep Trump in the White House 4 more years.

Rubio warns Twitter after it puts fact-check label on Trump tweet

Sen. Marco Rubio fired a warning shot at Twitter after it appended a fact-check label to President Trump’s tweets about mail-in voting. The Florida Republican said Tuesday that Twitter “should no longer be shielded from liability” and treated as a publisher if it decides to deviate from its...

www.google.com

He never get things done because he is a RINO. He is a control opposition agent for the Deep State. They are preparing their attacks on Pres.Trump.

 

[Aletheia4u]

 

[rightwinger]

Republicans fight to the death for the right to spread misinformation

An extremely large percentage of political speech is misinformation. Are you arguing that the government should have the power to shut it down?

If Trump is unhappy with the rules of conduct on Twitter, he can take his business elsewhere

Do you not join in the fight for the right to say what you want to say, whether it's right or wrong? It would seem to me that freedom covers both.

Twitter has a right to establish rules for what can be posted

If Trump wants to post any lies he wants, he can sign up for USMB

Depends on what Twitter wants, they are a social media platform and have a right to ban people decide what content they want. What they did was become a publisher by posting commentary by posts or rate them. They have a right to be a publisher however that legally opens up them for potential libel.

Twitter can conduct their site the way they choose. That includes standards of conduct.
They are not a publisher, but allow people to use the site if they follow guidelines.

Trump has never been good at following guidelines

 

[rightwinger]

This is why we need to keep Trump in the White House 4 more years.

Rubio warns Twitter after it puts fact-check label on Trump tweet

Sen. Marco Rubio fired a warning shot at Twitter after it appended a fact-check label to President Trump’s tweets about mail-in voting. The Florida Republican said Tuesday that Twitter “should no longer be shielded from liability” and treated as a publisher if it decides to deviate from its...

www.google.com

Twitter should be very stupido to fuck with the goose that lays golden eggs for them, and hundreds of millions of followers, President Donald Trump.

If Trump fuks with them, they should suspend him from the site until the issue is resolved.

Let him run for President with an inactive Twitter account

 

[Papageorgio]

They have a right to publish however they would be reclassified as a publisher and then become libel for their content, not just what a politicians but everyone.

They are liable for their content and users can be sued for libel/defamation. James Woods was sued. Hollywood Docket: James Woods' Twitter Defamation Win Upheld by Appeals Court

Woods used Twitter, it is social media, Woods was sued and Twitter was not because it is a social media platform not a publisher.

 

[Papageorgio]

Depends on what Twitter wants, they are a social media platform and have a right to ban people decide what content they want. What they did was become a publisher by posting commentary by posts or rate them. They have a right to be a publisher however that legally opens up them for potential libel.

Exactly. But they haven't done anything libelous...

If they get classified as a publisher, then they can be sued for libel for whatever their posters post, not just themselves. Right now they can’t because they are a social media company.

 

[rightwinger]

Depends on what Twitter wants, they are a social media platform and have a right to ban people decide what content they want. What they did was become a publisher by posting commentary by posts or rate them. They have a right to be a publisher however that legally opens up them for potential libel.

Exactly. But they haven't done anything libelous...

If they get classified as a publisher, then they can be sued for libel for whatever their posters post, not just themselves. Right now they can’t because they are a social media company.

Social media is allowed to establish rules of conduct. Much like USMB does.

If I want to accuse someone of pedophilia and USMB bans me, do they have to be classified as a publisher?

 

[Papageorgio]

Republicans fight to the death for the right to spread misinformation

An extremely large percentage of political speech is misinformation. Are you arguing that the government should have the power to shut it down?

If Trump is unhappy with the rules of conduct on Twitter, he can take his business elsewhere

Do you not join in the fight for the right to say what you want to say, whether it's right or wrong? It would seem to me that freedom covers both.

Twitter has a right to establish rules for what can be posted

If Trump wants to post any lies he wants, he can sign up for USMB

Depends on what Twitter wants, they are a social media platform and have a right to ban people decide what content they want. What they did was become a publisher by posting commentary by posts or rate them. They have a right to be a publisher however that legally opens up them for potential libel.

Twitter can conduct their site the way they choose. That includes standards of conduct.
They are not a publisher, but allow people to use the site if they follow guidelines.

Trump has never been good at following guidelines

You are correct. The point Rubio was making, if Twitter themselves inserts their opinion into their content, they could be reclassified as a publisher.