I get it but the bottom line is Twitter is a private company and can do what it wants. The article makes some excellent points but in the end it is what it is. Trump is stepping out of his lane by trying to control something he cannot all because his ego cannot handle "facts."
Without scrolling up to read if this has been posted: Once you start fact checking you are then a publisher, so to speak, and you open yourself to being sued. Jack's platform was protected previously. I imagine that this protection is in jeopardy now. If I was Jack, I'd leave it alone and let it be the wild west. Why put yourself in that situation over a political dispute? Jack believes he has enough power. Maybe Jack is going all in.... Take away Trumps platform between now and the election and see how well Trump does? He bides him time hoping and maybe helping Biden wins. Ballsy.
Says who? How does linking facts equate to taking away Trump's platform? Seems you are making leaps of logic based on your personal ideas.
This is what I’m talking about @jiggyfly They’ve been exempt from liable suits...(I believe that’s the case. Someone pls correct me if I’m wrong). Or Fact Check Me ...lol. Trump’s executive order will affect Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects online platforms like Facebook and Twitter from being held liable for content posted by their users. The 1996 law states: "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.” US Attorney General William Barr said Thursday that the executive order will not revoke Section 230, but did not further explain how the order would impact it, only saying that social media companies have stretched the meaning of its original intention. The president argued on Thursday that once a platform like Twitter edits content, it "ceases to become a neutral public platform and becomes an editor with a viewpoint."
That's the thing. Trump is free to post his dishonest tweets and they are free to fact check... Especially since he is a frequent offender.
By and large, most experts I've seen say the EO did nothing and is for show. They say there is no precedence for taking these things to court and they'd likely get thrown out, or strung along until a new president came along to reverse the EO.
This is all true. Publisher's get sued for slander. Twitter didn't. Yeah, I'm not quite understanding the end game on Trump's end unless he intends to sue...which I'm sure he wants to regardless if he has a claim.
Twitter is not editing content, you and Trump are making stuff up to fit a narrative O's. None of this has anything to do with what Twitter did, they just provided a link.
" 'The President's Speech Police': Trump Pushes Forward With Regulating Bias Online": https://reason.com/2020/07/28/fcc-c...the-agency-into-the-presidents-speech-police/
Ha! This is what got him elected. If he wants to hurt his own chances...couldn't happen to a nicer fella.
The only way to do this is to have a hundred thousand "internet police" like China. If they can't screen the whole internet, they're just cherrypicking their enemies. (P.S. This is probably Zuckerberg's position. "You want me to screen every post on Facebook every moment?? I'm about making money, not being the NSA!")
