Quin_Dub wrote: » Basically -Yes Under current laws , Social Media can't really be sued for something that someone posted on their platform - There are obviously some exceptions but the burden of proof makes it almost impossible for Social Media to be found guilty for something someone else did. For example , right now Joe Scarborough couldn't sue Twitter for Trumps posts accusing him of Murder , he can sue Trump , but not Twitter. It Trump got his way , Scarborough could then also sue Twitter and any other Social Media platform that displayed the Trump accusation. The upshot of that law change (which will never actually happen BTW)- Twitter would simply delete Trumps account (and many many others) as he has a proven track record of stuff that could get them sued, to avoid future litigation.
hetuzozaho wrote: » But I think what he wants is for Twitter to not get involved. Like they can get involved if they want but that will move them to publisher status and then goodbye to their protection. But if they want to be protected and just the carry our messages they need to stop get involved in the messages.
omerin wrote: » The whole tv crew are now being arrested, lol by the state police
Christy42 wrote: » Well he has moved them to publisher. I mean it will likely fail but right now they can say they are being cautious of the law. Plus even if they back down their tos is part of their business model. They have to get involved to a certain degree or end up like 4chan. The only way out for them (presuming the law doesn't fail in the courts which it likely will) is to go over the top moderation.
Christy42 wrote: » Can you link to details? What it is for etc.?
sundodger5 wrote: » https://edition.cnn.com/us/live-news/george-floyd-protest-updates-05-28-20/h_4ed08403663fa4ed3518221d0f2a1552
salmocab wrote: » I just heard Trump on the radio saying he’d like nothing more than to give up his Twitter account. If only there was a way to stop using Twitter. Think Don think!
trashcan wrote: » It's really just awful the way "they" keep forcing him to post on twitter isn't it ?
Nody wrote: » Nah; it's all ground work for Don to launch his own supported Trump TV channel. Fox is no longer good enough and are joining the fake news media in not telling the truth etc. It gives him a chance to have his own channel dedicated to "telling it like it is" and basically become worst of Fox and Breitbart news combined with him always being right. Of course I think the channel in general will fail in a few years but as so many other Trump investments he'll make sure he's pocketed as much money before the company goes bankrupt.
Christy42 wrote: » Well he has moved them to publisher. I mean it will likely fail but right now they can say they are being cautious of the law. Plus even if they back down their tos is part of their business model. They have to get involved to a certain degree or end up like 4chan.
Blueshoe wrote: » Yah heard it myself. On Irish news radio. Today FM I believe. They left out the end of the quote. What a surprise.
Deleted User wrote: » The implications for the likes of gab could be far more serious. Their platform is associated with terror attacks and mass shootings on a regular basis.
banie01 wrote: » The rub here is that invoking free or protected speech does not in any way guarantee a right to be published. Many newspapers and periodicals will publish opinion pieces and label them as such, not from a legal obligation but some notion of equity and balance. Platforms allow users to self publish. Should platforms become publishers, that will not come with any inherent obligation to publish. It allows a creep in censorship, and pushes the "responsibility" for it the platforms. Trump using "free speech" to dictate to a company just how, when and what free speech is? Is quite ironic in light of the stance taken by Trump and the NFL to simple protest. Imagine if Kaepernick called for violence? Or is that just the protected domain of El Presidenté!
Leroy42 wrote: » I assume they arrested the rest of the crew, seems strange they would only arrest the lead guy (correspondent would he be called?)
Quin_Dub wrote: » Yep - OANN Junior and a few others have bought a stake in the company that owns it.
sydthebeat wrote: » https://edition.cnn.com/us/live-news/george-floyd-protest-updates-05-28-20/h_4ed08403663fa4ed3518221d0f2a1552 video of arrest here
hetuzozaho wrote: » It seems like they are in an area they should not be in? But he does ask them on the video where he should go, maybe they are replying and because not mic'd we cannot hear them? Would seem odd that they did not say or even gesture where he should go etc.
hetuzozaho wrote: » But Gab wouldn't be effected as they are not getting involved with the content?