Elon Musk Offer to purchase Twitter

[TreeFrogTrader]

My point is some of you are claiming the "censorship" of ideas by twitter is some constitutional issue..... its not. twitters twit what they goin' twit and twitter can decide what twatty twits they dont like.

Also 230 is often misunderstood:

Section 230(c)(1) provides immunity from liability for providers and users of an "interactive computer service" who publish information provided by third-party users:

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.

Section 230(c)(2) further provides "Good Samaritan" protection from civil liability for operators of interactive computer services in the good faith removal or moderation of third-party material they deem "obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected.


Seems to be crystal clear you cannot sue twitter just because they remove political messages they deem to be one of those things above.




There is no free market of ideas if you are using someone's private platform to post and must follow their terms of service. Free market of ideas means you have freedom to put your ideas out there... IT DOES NOT GRANT YOU AN UNLIMITED RIGHT TO POST THOSE IDEAS WHEREEVER YOU WANT IF YOU DONT FOLLOW THEIR RULES.


This is why Americans always misunderstand everything.

Yeh, you gave the bumper sticker recitation of the implications of Section 230. These social media ceo's are relying upon it and other protections to protect them from all sort of liabilities such their maintaining platforms where child porn and trafficking etc occur and then hide behind free speech protections, Section 230 etc when it works for them.

Not going to do the full discussion. Let's just say you point out that they are private companies and I am down with that as long as they are on the hook for all the responsibilities that go with it. There a reason, eh, why Zuckerberg and others want more regulation rather than less, right? They want to play the public utility game.

 

[TreeFrogTrader]

The vet was right to be upset but wrong to claim her freedom of speech was infringed:

I’m not seeing Democrats being censored. I’m seeing conservatives censored," Smith told Fox News. "They’ve got 100% control over our freedom of speech right now on these platforms, and I find that to be very scary."


LinkedIn made a bad choice in blocking her post but it does not infring upon her freedom of speech....isnt she on FOX news telling her story to the world? DIdnt she say she posted the same post on numerous social media sites and only LinkedIn blocked her?

Smith posted her story and views on student loan forgiveness across social media platforms on Thursday, including on her Code of Vets page.

Sorry...LinkedIn is a networking site for work anyway.

I see. Linked-in = okay because she was able to post and speak elsewhere. giggle.

Fucking extremist posting his shiite online in New York and they wouldn't touch him with a ten foot pole because he looks like a dem or a skin color type.

 

[El OchoCinco]

I see. Linked-in = okay because she was able to post and speak elsewhere. giggle.

Fucking extremist posting his shiite online in New York and they wouldn't touch him with a ten foot pole because he looks like a dem or a skin color type.

you are supporting my point basically... these people can moderate their sites and if a post is offensive people can complain and have them taken down. If not then the public can outcry or complain like they do when any private company takes a position they dont agree with.

FOX news can put out whatever it wants and CNN can. twitter can have its terms of service and determine if a post violates it and or have a process for people to complain about a post.

But no fantasy right is violted because one post stays up and another is taken down...it is just sourgrapes.

Your outrage is justifiable, dont get me wrong. But no right to free speech is being violated.

 

[TreeFrogTrader]

The vet was right to be upset but wrong to claim her freedom of speech was infringed:

We don't actually know yet whether she has a valid constitutional argument or not.

It depends on where this issue of whether these companies are totally private or whether they will continue to push for quasi-public utililty with regulation status.

If it is the latter, then she her claim arguably has merit, in that she is entitle to equal access in the absence of clear wrongdoing.

Not going to do the full argument here today. Just sayin, more to come. These media clowns can't have it both ways.

 

[TreeFrogTrader]

you are supporting my point basically... these people can moderate their sites and if a post is offensive people can complain and have them taken down. If not then the public can outcry or complain like they do when any private company takes a position they dont agree with.

FOX news can put out whatever it wants and CNN can. twitter can have its terms of service and determine if a post violates it and or have a process for people to complain about a post.

But no fantasy right is violted because one post stays up and another is taken down...it is just sourgrapes.

Your outrage is justifiable, dont get me wrong. But no right to free speech is being violated.

I am okay, again, with the "they are private" model. As long as they face all the liabilities and responsibilities that go with it. Which is not the case now.


Done for now.

 

[Tsing Tao]

Liberal meltdowns.

 

[Tsing Tao]

 

[Mercor]

All these people should be banned from social media.
Insane conclusions

 

[notagain]

The right will miss the lefts imagination and twisted logic.
Sheep need to love Trump again...vote yes for freedom.
All the rich bastards out there, only Elon cares enough to do the right thing.

 

[El OchoCinco]

Elon focusing on Twitter should worry all Tesla stock holders..... the man is losing his focus and vision on what his company actually does for a living and could hurt the brand over time.