- Sep 13, 2012
- Reaction score
They admit in their terms of service they will boost and suppress what tweets are seen. They’re adding subtext to peoples tweets. The NY post is still locked out of their account for printing a campaign killer story with a fuck ton of evidence. They are editors. It’s much more than allowing every tweet. It’s the duration of information, you know the thing editors doSo, unless they allow every tweet they are being “editors”?No
no one is talking about regulation. We’re talking about removing a sweetheart protection deal in section 230. They can decide whether they want to behave as editors, or if they want to behave like platforms. If they decide they want to be editors, then they’ll no longer receive the protection from liable. It’s literally that simple. We’re in midst of this problem because government already got into bed with them and offered them protection.My biggest worry, politically, since Trump was elected in 2016, has been what would happen in the aftermath. The liberal backlash is going to be ugly. Liberals used to at least pretend to care about liberty. Now they openly despise it. And while political expedience has them currently opposing Trump's efforts to "regulate" social media, that's sort of thing they usually support. The only thing currently keeping it in check is partisan gridlock.
Which worries me.
If Republicans lose the Senate, and the White House, I think we'll see a major effort by Democrats to seize control of (aka "regulate") major social media companies. And, given that Trumpsters have been clamoring for just that, and the fact that they'll be in the minority, Republicans will offer precious little resistance.