POTUS 45.64: Governance By Unhinged Twitter Rants

[bronconick]

Re: POTUS 45.64: Governance By Unhinged Twitter Rants

Now the media covers Trump's Twitter temper tantrum instead of the Michigan Stadium full of corpses. He's not disciplined enough to do this, but those around him are.

 

[Slap Shot]

Re: POTUS 45.64: Governance By Unhinged Twitter Rants

BS. In this political climate, he meant what he originally said.

He didn't walk it back later - it was a continuous statement and there was no hint of, "oops". It's a charged statement to be sure but let's focus on real matters.

 

[aparch]

Re: POTUS 45.64: Governance By Unhinged Twitter Rants

And the draft of the Executive Order against Social Media has leaked:
https://www.cnet.com/news/trump-executive-order-leaked-draft-slams-twitter-facebook-for-censoring/

No other official details about what the executive order will contain have been released, but the Washington Post reported late Wednesday that it will be a wide-ranging order directing federal regulators to rethink Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act from 1996, which provides online platforms with vital protection from liability for content posted by their users.

A draft of the order was reportedly obtained by multiple media organizations, including Reuters and Protocol, late Wednesday. Kate Klonick, an assistant legal professor at St. John's University School of Law, also published what she said was a draft version of the executive order on Twitter.

The apparent draft version of the order, which could change, would instruct the Commerce Department to ask the Federal Communications Commission to call a rulemaking proceeding to reconsider the law's purview. It would also give the Federal Trade Commission responsibility for investigating complaints of political bias to determine whether tech companies' content moderation policies conflict with their pledges for neutrality.

 

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

Re: POTUS 45.64: Governance By Unhinged Twitter Rants

I mean won’t relaxing these laws lead to a lot of legal action against conservatives who post absolute lies?

 

[Drew S.]

Re: POTUS 45.64: Governance By Unhinged Twitter Rants

Saw a short clip of Zuckerberg this morning and he had an absolute shocker. If he had his way Trump could post anything he wanted on Facebook.

 

[mookie1995]

Saw a short clip of Zuckerberg this morning and he had an absolute shocker. If he had his way Trump could post anything he wanted on Facebook.

Well the dude did get his start with “hot or not”

 

[SJHovey]

Re: POTUS 45.64: Governance By Unhinged Twitter Rants

I mean won’t relaxing these laws lead to a lot of legal action against conservatives who post absolute lies?

I think you can make those claims right now. It's the liability of places like Twitter or Facebook that they're fighting over, I think.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: POTUS 45.64: Governance By Unhinged Twitter Rants

I assume the Executive Order is simply a not-so-subtle threat that he'll take their liability exemption away if they fail to please him.

 

[unofan]

Re: POTUS 45.64: Governance By Unhinged Twitter Rants

I assume the Executive Order is simply a not-so-subtle threat that he'll take their liability exemption away if they fail to please him.

If he does that, then the breitbart's and drudge's of the world should be even more nervous.

This is the epitome of biting off your nose to spite your face.

 

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

If he does that, then the breitbart's and drudge's of the world should be even more nervous.

This is the epitome of biting off your nose to spite your face.

That’s what I was getting at

 

[SJHovey]

Re: POTUS 45.64: Governance By Unhinged Twitter Rants

If he does that, then the breitbart's and drudge's of the world should be even more nervous.

This is the epitome of biting off your nose to spite your face.

Aren't the Breitbarts and Drudges of the world already subject to that? Wasn't that what the Hulk Hogan case was about?

I thought the way it worked is that if I run a website like USCHO, and one of my columnists writes a defamatory column, I can be sued just like the NY Times, along with the columnist. However, if Kepler comes onto the USCHO message board and makes a defamatory comment, USCHO is not liable under the same exemption that sites like Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, etc..., receive.

 

[unofan]

Re: POTUS 45.64: Governance By Unhinged Twitter Rants

Aren't the Breitbarts and Drudges of the world already subject to that? Wasn't that what the Hulk Hogan case was about?

I thought the way it worked is that if I run a website like USCHO, and one of my columnists writes a defamatory column, I can be sued just like the NY Times, along with the columnist. However, if Kepler comes onto the USCHO message board and makes a defamatory comment, USCHO is not liable under the same exemption that sites like Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, etc..., receive.

While I admit it's been years since I've clicked on a breitbart link, I vaguely remember there being a comments section at the bottom of their articles where the sycophants went to town.

 

[aparch]

Re: POTUS 45.64: Governance By Unhinged Twitter Rants

Aren't the Breitbarts and Drudges of the world already subject to that? Wasn't that what the Hulk Hogan case was about?

No, the Hulk Hogan case was the fact that Gawker got Bubba the Love Sponge's DVD (or a copy) where Hulk Hogan was bangin' Bubba's wife. Hulk Hogan argued that while he was a public celebrity, it wasn't right for his junk to be broadcast to the world.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: POTUS 45.64: Governance By Unhinged Twitter Rants

While I admit it's been years since I've clicked on a breitbart link, I vaguely remember there being a comments section at the bottom of their articles where the sycophants went to town.

Yeah, you are certainly right about the comments section. But I think that for columns written, those sites are already subject to the same rules that apply to the NY Times, Gawker, etc...

 

[SJHovey]

Re: POTUS 45.64: Governance By Unhinged Twitter Rants

No, the Hulk Hogan case was the fact that Gawker got Bubba the Love Sponge's DVD (or a copy) where Hulk Hogan was bangin' Bubba's wife. Hulk Hogan argued that while he was a public celebrity, it wasn't right for his junk to be broadcast to the world.

Right, Gawker published it.

What we are talking about is what if someone posted a 20 second clip of it on Twitter or Facebook? Right now Twitter and Facebook could not be held liable under the exemption that Trump is threatening to take away.

Edit. What it really comes down to is, "who is the publisher?" Facebook and Twitter argue (thus far successfully) that they aren't the "publisher" (it's not their content), they just provide the electronic platform to do it.

 

[Slap Shot]

Re: POTUS 45.64: Governance By Unhinged Twitter Rants

Trump won't care if there are unintended consequences because he's never considered anything but his own instant gratification. He doesn't use Breitbart or Drudge to brainwash his sycophants and if he can threaten Twitter's existence because they might possibly have to legitimately consider if they'd be sued into oblivion he wins this fight.

Surely this would be brought to the SC but would that happen in time? He's in desperation mode to win this election and is going to stop short of actually murdering someone on Fifth Avenue even though we know no one would care if he did.

 

[rufus]

If he does that, then the breitbart's and drudge's of the world should be even more nervous.

This is the epitome of biting off your nose to spite your face.

So, then Twitter should be pulling his tweets, rather than leaving up his blatant falsehoods against Joe Scarborough, and leaving themselves open to potential lawsuits?

What's the downside here?

 

[SJHovey]

Re: POTUS 45.64: Governance By Unhinged Twitter Rants

So, then Twitter should be pulling his tweets, rather than leaving up his blatant falsehoods against Joe Scarborough, and leaving themselves open to potential lawsuits?

What's the downside here?

The downside for Twitter is that there is a lot of nonsense on Twitter outside of what Trump tweets. His would have to be among the first to go, but where to start, and for that matter, how do they even manage it? Is someone going to read every single tweet?

 

[Kepler]

Re: POTUS 45.64: Governance By Unhinged Twitter Rants

You don't kick him off. You write laws such that particular statements carry penalties. Political speech should be protected, but libelous speech by political figures it still libel.

You can't just accuse somebody of murder.

 

[aparch]

Re: POTUS 45.64: Governance By Unhinged Twitter Rants

He's never actually accused Joe of anything. All Trump does, as he has done for EVERYTHING in his past, is to give you point A, point B, and a pencil for you to draw the line between them. He does it for EVERYTHING.