Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Trump signs executive order targeting protections for social media companies

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 1001 posts

Re: Trump signs executive order targeting protections for social media companies

#371

Post by evan_ »

mindslight wrote: post #266
b0sk wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely. To get a slice of that thinking. Here's Rush Limbaugh: (backstory: Trump has been repeatedly peddling an absolutely baseless claim that his TV critic Joe Scarborough murdered his employee couple of decades back. Her husband is now pleading that Trump is causing irreparable damage to their family). Anyway, here's Limbaugh: “The thing here is when you get to Trump and his conspiracy theories, he does it in…

Most people, if they spent their time at work trolling and shitposting instead of doing the job they were paid to do, would simply be fired.

he's doing what he was elected to do.

Re: Trump signs executive order targeting protections for social media companies

#372

Post by ilaksh »

Again, parallel universes.

For half of the people out there, believe it or not, this is Trump sticking up for people's free speech on Twitter.

For the other half, this is Trump attempting to eliminate free speech on Twitter and other places.

In my opinion, eliminating the protections could have a negative effect on free speech. But it also seems like a very bad outcome in general for the companies that they would want to avoid. So it seems like this is being used as a threat to try to get them to take free speech more seriously, so they can avoid that policing.

Another thing is the website or whatever collecting instances of censorship. That seems to indicate that they are genuinely trying to help reduce censorship. Does it not?

Re: Trump signs executive order targeting protections for social media companies

#373

Post by chrisco255 »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #304
partyboat1586 wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twitter is _the_ place where political discourse happens. It's an unfortunate state of affairs for some that it happens to be a private company with a bias. And for better of for worse it does have a bias.

> it happens to be a private company with a bias Political speech in public squares are what the First Amendment was written to protect. “Bias” isn’t an exception.

There have been rulings protecting free speech rights in shopping centers. There have been rulings protecting free speech rights against HOAs. There are certainly many cases where a private company has tried to leverage power over free speech and lost and this is one of those cases.

Re: Trump signs executive order targeting protections for social media companies

#374

Post by thwave »

partyboat1586 wrote: post #314
epistasis wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We really have reached the stage where "facts have a well-known liberal bias", haven't we?

What is and isn't fact is for people to decide by themselves based on evidence. Not whatever Twitter decides is the truth. There are very few hard facts in this world especially surrounding politics.

What is and isn't evidence is for people to decide by themselves based on facts?

Re: Trump signs executive order targeting protections for social media companies

#375

Post by partyboat1586 »

javagram wrote: post #324
partyboat1586 wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twitter is _the_ place where political discourse happens. It's an unfortunate state of affairs for some that it happens to be a private company with a bias. And for better of for worse it does have a bias.

“ Twitter is _the_ place where political discourse happens.” Say what? https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2019/04/24/sizing-up-tw... Twitter is a minority. Fox News Channel is arguably the place where political discourse happens. It’s the most popular cable news network in America. Should Fox News be regulated and forced to have a democrat on each show?

That's not real political discourse, that's programming. Also major networks regularly quote Twitter.

The thing Twitter has is that it is a public forum where people who disagree can meet. I'd hate for it to become an echo chamber like Fox news.

Re: Trump signs executive order targeting protections for social media companies

#376

Post by paulgb »

coliveira wrote: post #357
chrisco255 wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry big tech is subject to antitrust laws that have been on the books for 120+ years. The Federal Government could break Twitter up into 10 different pieces if it deemed the service a monopoly. That's not totalitarian, that's clearly justified. These platforms claim all the immunity of a utility while actively engaging in algorithmic and human-induced bias that completely slants the platform. In some cases the plat…

The problem is not the existence of anti-trust laws and other regulations - these things are good. The problem is the blatant political use of these tools. If a company becomes a problem to the Trump regime, they will use the full array of existing laws to prosecute them, at the same time when they are dismantling legislation that targets their allies.

Agreed, but also -- if it's an issue of antitrust law, use antitrust law! Not the CDA by way of an executive order.

Re: Trump signs executive order targeting protections for social media companies

#377

Post by vannevar »

bedhead wrote: post #227

The problem with Twitter and Facebook is that the lines are getting blurry with regards to public vs private. Like it or not, a couple tech platforms are the de facto new town squares. Not saying I have any answers, just saying it's definitely not a clear issue anymore.

Like it or not, a couple tech platforms are the de facto new town squares.

I'd agree, but de facto is not de jure. And if we're going to make them into public spaces legally, it's certainly not going to happen through an executive order. It would require an act of Congress, similar to the restrictions and obligations placed on broadcasters.

Re: Trump signs executive order targeting protections for social media companies

#378

Post by rbanffy »

smeeth wrote: post #326

Of course this is being handled ham-handedly, but it seems to me that section 230 is a ludicrous piece of legislative malfeasance that allows content publishers to duck the legal responsibilities of publishing while profiting from behavior that is obviously publishing. I can't see how a Twitter/FB feed is substantively different from a curated "letters to the editor" section in a newspaper and I cannot for the life o…

Without S230, Twitter and Facebook would not curate or moderate any content - you'd be constantly bombarded by a torrent of spam, vitriol and disinformation.

With S230, companies can remove the worst, most obvious ofenses without fearing being held accountable by the things they didn't find.

Re: Trump signs executive order targeting protections for social media companies

#379

Post by partyboat1586 »

jrockway wrote: post #356
partyboat1586 wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is and isn't fact is for people to decide by themselves based on evidence. Not whatever Twitter decides is the truth. There are very few hard facts in this world especially surrounding politics.

> What is and isn't fact is for people to decide by themselves based on evidence. That is why Twitter is linking some facts to go along with the President's tweets.

Which facts you choose can show bias. Let people supply sources in replies.

Re: Trump signs executive order targeting protections for social media companies

#380

Post by ddoolin »

suyash wrote: post #368
chrisco255 wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry big tech is subject to antitrust laws that have been on the books for 120+ years. The Federal Government could break Twitter up into 10 different pieces if it deemed the service a monopoly. That's not totalitarian, that's clearly justified. These platforms claim all the immunity of a utility while actively engaging in algorithmic and human-induced bias that completely slants the platform. In some cases the plat…

Great move by President Trump, social media companies think they can ban/shadow ban anyone for anything that they don't like, it's time for some reality check.

Why can't they?
Post reply on HN