12-29-2020, 03:17 PM
12-29-2020, 03:58 PM
I’m torn on this.
If companies can’t be held liable, what would motivate them to censor disinformation?
One thing is for certain, there definitely needs to be more accountability with those who are posting.
If companies can’t be held liable, what would motivate them to censor disinformation?
One thing is for certain, there definitely needs to be more accountability with those who are posting.
12-29-2020, 09:53 PM
Ok after digging a little I figured it out ( I think).
Trump is pissed that Twitter keeps flagging or taking down tweets and banning his cronies. He feels that is violating the 1st Amendment. Section 230 absolves tech companies from 1st Amendment protections therefore they can rid their platform of the slime.
He wants Twitter to have to leave his garbage tweets alone.
BUT section 230 says these companies are now responsible for what is posted, so they will become even more vigilant on posts that may be slander/libel.
I would imagine BGR doesn’t support this at all. The only social media companies that could survive would be Facebook and Twitter and they would be heavily censored.
Trump is pissed that Twitter keeps flagging or taking down tweets and banning his cronies. He feels that is violating the 1st Amendment. Section 230 absolves tech companies from 1st Amendment protections therefore they can rid their platform of the slime.
He wants Twitter to have to leave his garbage tweets alone.
BUT section 230 says these companies are now responsible for what is posted, so they will become even more vigilant on posts that may be slander/libel.
I would imagine BGR doesn’t support this at all. The only social media companies that could survive would be Facebook and Twitter and they would be heavily censored.