President Trump's Executive Order on Preventing Online Censorship

[BAT31]

Lots of of emotional comment on this page. Choosing to hate something first and find an excuse to back up that position rather than looking at the facts first then choosing the stance.

If someone else other than Trump was to introduce this executive order, it would have a resounding approval here (unless that individual loves restricted speech).

Very similar to racism, some look at the colour of the skin first then choose to hate that individual then proceed to find an excuse to back that position( or sometimes without reason).

You have to be a complete imbecile to not see the hypocrisy in Trump's actions. No emotions, just facts.

Let me put it in crayon for you:

1. Trump sought to abridge Kaepernick's freedom of expression.

2. Trump threw an executive tantrum, because Twitter simply labeled (didn't removed) his misinformed tweets.

3. Trump uses his bully pulpit to advocate the spreading of misinformation unchecked by passing an executive order.

Yes, I HATE Trump, for justifiable reasons.

 

[qaz]

You have to be a complete imbecile to not see the hypocrisy in Trump's actions. No emotions, just facts.

Let me put it in crayon for you:

1. Trump sought to abridge Kaepernick's freedom of expression.

2. Trump threw an executive tantrum, because Twitter simply labeled (didn't removed) his misinformed tweets.

3. Trump uses his bully pulpit to advocate the spreading of misinformation unchecked by passing an executive order.

Yes, I HATE Trump, for justifiable reasons.

I judge a President by the result. He might be unlikable in character but the job gets done. If you are not sure what he has accomplished prior to this Corona virus outbreak then you need to start diversifying your news source and be open minded. Don't be that North korean that blindly believes that "America is a 3rd world country" because their domestic news outlet says so. Propaganda can be spread in many forms even in a democratic country.

That does not mean I agree with all his policies but this Executive Order on Preventing Online Censorship is a good move on freedom of speech.

 

[Cuddles]

I judge a President by the result. He might be unlikable in character but the job gets done. If you are not sure what he has accomplished prior to this Corona virus outbreak then you need to start diversifying your news source and be open minded. Don't be that North korean that blindly believes that "America is a 3rd world country" because their domestic news outlet says so. Propaganda can be spread in many forms even in a democratic country.

That does not mean I agree with all his policies but this Executive Order on Preventing Online Censorship is a good move on freedom of speech.

The job done here is stifling the free speech of a private company. Right wing outlets are the biggest spreaders of propaganda, and guess what? It's protected speech.

 

[Real Money]

The job done here is stifling the free speech of a private company. Right wing outlets are the biggest spreaders of propaganda, and guess what? It's protected speech.

Apparently it's flying over your head.

He's saying that these "private companies" are censoring content on their platform for the communist Chinese, and even enabling the surveillance state. And they are, because they're in bed with the CCP.

It's no longer possible to distinguish between home grown Trump hate in the media and anti Trump propaganda that's bankrolled by the communists. Chinese are pushing a 'soft power' agenda. That's what he said. It's clear.

 

[Cuddles]

Apparently it's flying over your head.

He's saying that these "private companies" are censoring content on their platform for the communist Chinese, and even enabling the surveillance state. And they are, because they're in bed with the CCP.

It's no longer possible to distinguish between home grown Trump hate in the media and anti Trump propaganda that's bankrolled by the communists. Chinese are pushing a 'soft power' agenda. That's what he said. It's clear.

Except qaz said nothing about the chinese in the post quoted so good luck w/your conspiracies.

 

[Sig]

If someone else other than Trump was to introduce this executive order, it would have a resounding approval here (unless that individual loves restricted speech).

So you're saying if 2 weeks ago Nancy Pelosi introduced legislation saying Twitter wasn't allowed to accurately point out something she tweeted was false it would have had your resounding approval and you would have been here defending her exactly the same as you're defending Trump? Again, your lack of self awareness and hypocrisy is just stunning.

And no, none of us who are appalled by this would have supported it if anyone had introduced it. Unlike you, I would be just as furious if Obama or Pelosi did this, but of course that's a strawman because neither ever did or would. You don't get to decide how all of us who actually support free speech as defined in the Constitution think, and your assertion that we would support this in any guise is complete and utter bullshit that you pulled out of your ass.

 

[Sig]

Apparently it's flying over your head.

He's saying that these "private companies" are censoring content on their platform for the communist Chinese, and even enabling the surveillance state. And they are, because they're in bed with the CCP.

It's no longer possible to distinguish between home grown Trump hate in the media and anti Trump propaganda that's bankrolled by the communists. Chinese are pushing a 'soft power' agenda. That's what he said. It's clear.

Guess who else prohibits private companies from pointing out when their leader lies? You guessed it, China! If you dislike China so much, why in the world are you advocating for us to be more like them in restricting freedoms? And why, why are you not as upset about the President of the United States lying about the foundation of our democracy in an attempt to undermine confidence in our voting system as you are about Twitter pointing out that lie? Until you can come to terms with that in a rational way, which you've gone to great lengths to avoid here, your position lacks any intellectual integrity. As an otherwise reasonable and intelligent guy, it genuinely baffles me how you're able to live with holding this position?

 

[KCalhoun]

It's a tough balancing act. Platforms do need to moderate content to avoid extremist stuff like hate groups and dangerous posts.

I understand Trump's point too... if they go labeling and fact checking his posts,, it's only fair that they should do that for other politicians as well. Where does it end? Politicizing platforms, like current news media, impacts people's perceptions, for good or bad.

Freedom of speech online imho should not mean anything goes, there should be equally enforced guidelines.

 

[Sig]

I judge a President by the result. He might be unlikable in character but the job gets done. If you are not sure what he has accomplished prior to this Corona virus outbreak then you need to start diversifying your news source and be open minded. Don't be that North korean that blindly believes that "America is a 3rd world country" because their domestic news outlet says so. Propaganda can be spread in many forms even in a democratic country.

That does not mean I agree with all his policies but this Executive Order on Preventing Online Censorship is a good move on freedom of speech.

Pinochet made Chile much more prosperous than it was before his brutal dictatorship. Stalin won a major war and brought Russia from a country of desperately poor peasants to one of two superpowers. This belief that Trump can do no evil as long as he's accomplishing "results", even if you truly believe he's accomplish these "results", is not only utterly facile but extremely dangerous to democracy. A basic civics course would do you a world of good.

 

[Sig]

It's a tough balancing act. Platforms do need to moderate content to avoid extremist stuff like hate groups and dangerous posts.

I understand Trump's point too... if they go labeling and fact checking his posts,, it's only fair that they should do that for other politicians as well.

Freedom of speech online imho should not mean anything goes, there should be equally enforced guidelines.

Except "freedom of speech online" is a made-up concept that not only doesn't exist in our constitution but is expressly prohibited by it. Let me just quote the first amendment here to make it clear:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Note the first word of the amendment, "Congress". The government can't restrict free speech, and that is all. There is nothing anywhere in the Constitution or anywhere in our history compelling private companies or individuals to follow this restriction, and in fact the first amendment was specifically written to ensure private companies and individuals could do whatever that wanted with respect to speech. The founding fathers would no doubt be appalled to hear that anyone considered restricting a private company's right to speak up and accurately point out when the President was lying was "free speech".
But was really concerns me is you. You're a smart, reasonable guy. You already know everything I just said. Four years ago you would have been on the opposite side of this discussion. You would have rightly said that the constitutional remedy to a private company restricting what could be said or criticizing our leaders was to stop using that company and if you wanted to, use another or start another. Twitter is mostly open source, it would be trivial to replicate it, heck if you want to help raise funding I'll do it. You would have said that the President's remedy against a company pointing out he was lying was to not lie! What happened to cause you to sell your soul on something as fundamental as the first amendment? What can we do to get you back?