We hear your fear and the fear of lefties that Trump will return to Twitter. And we feel your pain. Reach out to us for help as needed because we are givers.
twitter is a privately owned social media site.... why are some of you triggered over a private company controlling its content why we talking about censorship as though this is a government... you dont like how twitter or FB moderate their own private company go elsewhere
Having a major dislike of a person such as the millions who hate Musk will make people spend the 5 minutes to switch imo.It will be the new fad/cool thing to do when all the cool celebrity leftist do it. FB is the 3rd most trafficked site in the world,I wouldnt consider that dying.
Sure. Let's nail that down legally, that they are private, and eliminate Section 230 protections. Let me know what Fuckerberg and others have to say. They want it both ways. Also, don't assume that free speech is censorship just because corporations or entities are criticized. It is the opposite. The free market of ideas might mean that we are not calling for censorship, but using free speech to trash and expose certain practices.
Trump is at the vanguard but it’s a much bigger issue involving misinformation, disinformation and that sort of thing. I get this is the swamp you wade in so you’re all for it so I can’t blame you.
Some truth to that. When I see a navy vet woman being banned on linked-in for tellng people that she does not want to pay for other people's student loans, I don't mind seeing a gadfly like Elon going after some of these clowns just to mix it up a little. I am entitled to some fun. Think of my needs.
My point is some of you are claiming the "censorship" of ideas by twitter is some constitutional issue..... its not. twitters twit what they goin' twit and twitter can decide what twatty twits they dont like. Also 230 is often misunderstood: Section 230(c)(1) provides immunity from liability for providers and users of an "interactive computer service" who publish information provided by third-party users: 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. Section 230(c)(2) further provides "Good Samaritan" protection from civil liability for operators of interactive computer services in the good faith removal or moderation of third-party material they deem "obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected. Seems to be crystal clear you cannot sue twitter just because they remove political messages they deem to be one of those things above. There is no free market of ideas if you are using someone's private platform to post and must follow their terms of service. Free market of ideas means you have freedom to put your ideas out there... IT DOES NOT GRANT YOU AN UNLIMITED RIGHT TO POST THOSE IDEAS WHEREEVER YOU WANT IF YOU DONT FOLLOW THEIR RULES. This is why Americans always misunderstand everything.
The vet was right to be upset but wrong to claim her freedom of speech was infringed: I’m not seeing Democrats being censored. I’m seeing conservatives censored," Smith told Fox News. "They’ve got 100% control over our freedom of speech right now on these platforms, and I find that to be very scary." LinkedIn made a bad choice in blocking her post but it does not infring upon her freedom of speech....isnt she on FOX news telling her story to the world? DIdnt she say she posted the same post on numerous social media sites and only LinkedIn blocked her? Smith posted her story and views on student loan forgiveness across social media platforms on Thursday, including on her Code of Vets page. Sorry...LinkedIn is a networking site for work anyway.