I was wondering if any of you smart guys can put in laymens terms what trump was talking about
1 Like
Sure. Twitter pointed out that Trump was lying when he said that mail-in voting was fraudulent. Now Trump is having a hissy fit & trying to create a legal pretext that will let him sue Twitter to stop them (or anyone else) from calling him a liar when he lies.
7 Likes
Actually they are just straight fact checking him from what I understand.
Which they have the total right to do.
Trump doesn’t have a leg to stand on, even as President.
8 Likes
With how flippant he is in throwing words around it’s about time that he got tuned back. People rely on him to lead the country, and he’s said a number of things that he outright made up.
8 Likes
It’s a question of a media platform using selective censorship.
For example, if you post something nasty on this website, regardless of what it’s about, Blizzard will ban you. It’s a blanket-wide sentiment, because they don’t want content like that on their site.
Twitter on the other hand has propped itself up as a neutral website, but it hasn’t acted as such. While individuals arguing death threats against the President are given a free pass, individuals arguing against those threats are routinely banned. For example.
As such, Twitter can no longer argue that it’s simply a platform for people too just discuss things, but a publisher of thought. And a website publishing or advocating for violence against the President is going to get some heavy scrutiny.
This is sort of the basics of what it’s about, not my own personal opinion.
10 Likes
I figured out who Trump is:
He is that 12 year old guy, on the playground at recess, when I was a kid. He is the one who just talks out of his behind, saying whatever he wants to say (with no facts to back it up.) When challenged, he gets mad at you for challenging him since obviously he is right.
I’m 53, so when I was 12 we did not have the Internet to instantly access to google something to challenge that kid.
He says he is taking a dangerous malaria medicine, for the heck of it, because he “heard good things.” So he doesn’t even have malaria, nor covid, but is just saying he is taking it because he “heard good things.” This could make the EXACT people who are most at risk, decide to take that medicine to somehow ward off covid (which it doesn’t do, at all.) So again, like that 12 year old at recess he is just simply lying, to try to get his point across. I’m not even understanding the reason he would be doing this for a dangerous thing, which is only for curing malaria when you would otherwise die (because you HAVE MALARIA.) Does he secretly own stock?
It is amazing that someone like him still exists in these times, that he is that way at an advanced age and that he is somehow our President. I did not vote for him, nor could I vote for Hillary. I stood back and was amazed that the choices were just so very bad.
By the way, I’m a Republican; Even so, I can’t abide someone who is totally unqualified being the leader. But, in retrospect, Hillary would have at least seemed “Presidential.”
If you are going to blanket say something like, “mail in voting is fraudulent”, then you have to actually make citations of legit studies that found it was fraudulent. Otherwise, you are just spreading misinformation and fear mongering; this is a time where mail in voting is VERY IMPORTANT for people who probably should not be physically at the polls, but they are very likely the old people who will pay attention to what the 12 year old at recess says.
Now that kid knows he can make “executive orders” if you challenge him. This is pretty darn frightening. If this was the plot of a TV series 10 years ago, people would have called it “…woefully unrealistic and impossible as a thing that ever would actually happen.”
10 Likes
Basically this, it’s a publisher v platform debate. Too many platforms like twitter and Facebook receive the benefits and protections of publishers without the regulation. But it’s easier for people to just say orange man bad
4 Likes
It’s also easier for people to fail to recognize that it’s actually both “orange man bad” and “a publisher vs. platform debate.”
2 Likes
Sounds to me like Trump got “checked” by Twitter and now hes salty. Referring to editorial decisions as if they were Hillarys emails. Answer me this, when twitter ceases to be a neutral public platform, do they become a hostile target?
3 Likes
Orange man hurt you
3 Likes
What Trump is talking about is US Code 230. There’s several notes to the law that are topical:
-
The Internet and other interactive computer services offer a forum for a true diversity of political discourse, unique opportunities for cultural development, and myriad avenues for intellectual activity.
-
The Internet and other interactive computer services have flourished, to the benefit of all Americans, with a minimum of government regulation
One the one hand, Trump is correct in arguing Twitter and other sites have violated the first, and shown selective bias. On the other hand, if Trump revokes the second, 230, then the internet will simply just be a bland collection of blandness. Which is wrong.
1 Like
Yes 230. I was getting to that but I had to take a writers break.
Strapping 230 would allow everyone and their mother to sue for content they deem racist.
But these things are NOTHING compared to the loss of our civil liberties. They are NOTHING compared to the danger of a treasonous lying government. They are NOTHING compared to the damage done to our society by mass media of news and entertainment being in the hands of an alien minority pursuing it’s own agenda. In a free society, one force that keeps the government from getting completely out of control is a free press. Even when the media also are crooked, if they atleast are hostile to the government they can keep the government in check. But when crooked media are in cahoots with a crooked government the country is in real trouble.
2 Likes
Civil liability No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of—
(A)
any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected
What constitutes such language is broad enough that websites could very well adopt a zero tolerance policy just to protect themselves. Telling someone to “Git Gud” could be considered harrassment. I just wanna grill
2 Likes
ActiBliz sends selfless tweet, media goes in.
The media is in cahoots with the Trump admin?
It is something to consider.
The EO is a sign of the times. I could copy/paste a ton of old media propaganda as it has shown us how the growth of government is politicizing life and weakening the nations moral fabric.
A vast majority of Americans are not independent thinkers, they just go with what’s popular or what other peons believe. Therefore, they comply with a plan even when its against their own interests.
except its not fraudulent… president obama quietly proved it when he let 6 seperats people convicted of mail in voter fraud off…its rampant and yes it is happening. as the old joke goes… my grand parents voted republican untill they died… since then they have steadily voted democrat…
God bless USA! 
One could argue DMCA already sailed that ship…