So that means you must understand the resistance to governmental actions about the virus
REMINDER: THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to monitor the Forums. However, THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to review any materials submitted to or posted on the Forums, and remove, delete, redact or otherwise modify such materials, in its sole discretion and for any reason whatsoever, at any time and from time to time, without notice or further obligation to you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to display or post any materials provided by you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to disclose, at any time and from time to time, any information or materials that we deem necessary or appropriate to satisfy any applicable law, regulation, contract obligation, legal or dispute process or government request. Click on the following hyperlinks to further read the applicable Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Twitter fact checks POTUS!
- Thread starter $kully
- Start date
Your childish GIF because you can't argue facts/merits.
Hey, Mr Free speech , how do you feel about Trump threatening to shut down private company twitter for fact checking his lies?
Good to see that Trumby is going to act upon the legal principal I was referring to in this post. You can't hide behind your status as a platform of free speech if you are editing. At that point you become a publisher rather than a platform and the legal ramifications are uuuuuuge. Same should go for YouTube.
Twitter did not retyped or edit his tweet. Twitter simply issued a reply. How is that considered editing?
I think i just lost some iq points. Its really simple as there are only two positions:
A common carrier does not interfere with free speech. Your cell phone operator does not "fact check" conversations.
Otoh, a publisher is perfectly able to edit/censor content. Their platform, their content, their rules.
Twtr and the other sm platforms have been mated. They either edit/ban trump and declare as publishers, or they dont and commit to carrier status.
If they decide on publishing, they will both lose 50% of their users (as trump takes his 70m elsewhere) + be swamped by copyright material to create a nexus for enfringe lawsuits.
If they elect common carrier status they will be swamped by legions of alt right bots, users and sh!t posters itching to go.
They are fuxored with this 4 year quasi straddling status ending. Time to choose - either one means lost eyeballs, clicks and revenues.
I think you have oversimplified the laws, give this a read, especially this bit:
"The legal protections in subsections (c)(1) and (c)(2) are completely independent of one another. There is no basis in the language of Section 230 to qualify (c)(1)’s immunity on platforms obtaining immunity under (c)(2). "
Trump Executive Order Misreads Key Law Promoting Free Expression Online and Violates the First Amendment
This post based its initial analysis on a draft Executive Order. It has been updated to reflect the final order, available here.President Trump’s Executive Order targeting social media companies is an assault on free expression online and a transparent attempt to retaliate against Twitter for its...
the clown car writes a clownburg executive order because his feelings got hurt
we've officially made america great again
we've officially made america great again
You saying "if you don't like what Trump says don't read his tweets" is just mocking yourself.
And attacking those who criticize him is no different than sucking Trump dick.
You and Grapeboi both.
This didn't just happen on a whim. The concept has been out there for over a year particularly as it pertains to YouTube.