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

451–460 of 1001 posts

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

#451

Post by CamperBob2 »

rbanffy wrote: post #430
CamperBob2 wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That arguably changes when the President starts to use it as a primary means of communication with the citizenry.

They didn't remove his message. They merely pointed out it was misinforming the public. Speaking of which, shouldn't we make it a crime to lie or substantially mislead the public while holding public office?

Yeah, I don't disagree with their actions in this case -- if anything, they didn't phrase it strongly enough. ("Get the facts about voting by mail," as opposed to "Caution: this Tweet is unadulterated horseshit.")

But I also think that the more Twitter is used to disintermediate political communication, the more it starts to look like a vital public utility. It's tough to say where the line will or should be drawn. I don't envy Jack Dorsey's position, that's for sure.

As far as making a law that prohibits politicians from lying to the public, I don't see a way to write a law like that without making the situation even worse.

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

#452

Post by scaredtobeme »

downvoteme1 wrote: post #183
TheColorYellow wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its an interesting thought experiment to assess in what ways Twitter is a "private website". It really is a public web space that is operated by a private company, but I can't help but feel that the nuances and similarities of what Twitter really is and what responsibility they truly hold in society is above the courts comprehension.

Why do you think Twitter is a public space. Your use of twitter is governed by agreeing to its T&C’s. You agree to them when signing up and violating them will result in bans.

It's a public space because it's become the dominant platform for political debate.

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

#453

Post by ikeyany »

illumin8 wrote: post #211
nostromo wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Be aware that the DC Circuit leans left, by a lot -- so it's an unsurprising result. The Supreme Court may eventually take one of these cases and come to a different conclusion.

Since when is protecting the private property rights of corporations a "left" issue? This is a constitutional issue, and the fact that any court ruling that GOP voters disagree with is now a "left" issue tells you everything you need to know about how far civil discourse in this country has fallen.

It has been framed that way by Trump, and it's not exactly subtle. People have also been intimidated into thinking that pointing out Trump's propaganda makes them seem biased.

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

#454

Post by failuser »

raldi wrote: post #13
ComputerGuru wrote: post #5

Another source with some remarks from a Democrat FCC commissioner: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/05/28/trump-s...

Democrat is not an adjective.

I thought you can use any noun as an adjective in English.

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

#455

Post by burfog »

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?

They practically do have a democrat on each show. Times have changed, and Fox News is not at all what it once was. They even hired Donna Brazile, famous for slipping CNN debate questions to Hilary Clinton in advance and then being given the job of running the Democratic National Committee.

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

#456

Post by pnw_hazor »

partyboat1586 wrote: post #214
downvoteme1 wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think Twitter is a public space. Your use of twitter is governed by agreeing to its T&C’s. You agree to them when signing up and violating them will result in bans.

You're just repeating what the current state of affairs is. Doesn't mean it has to stay that way.

It would be surprising, but not irrational if courts construe Twitter as a quasi-public forum. Or, on the other hand, if Twitter continues to exercise viewpoint discrimination, it would be reasonable for them to be construed as a publisher and accept the liability that comes along with it.

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

#457

Post by partyboat1586 »

asdgopiahsogfi wrote: post #450
partyboat1586 wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twitter is _the_ place where political discourse happens not just _a_ place where it happens. It's an unfortunate state of affairs that they happen to be a private company with a bias.

Here's simple fact check. Twitter is not _the_ place where political discourse happens. You're discussing politics on HN right now.

It's the place that regularly gets quoted on major networks and newspapers. This is a minority website with nowhere near as much impact.

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

#458

Post by ineedasername »

serpix wrote: post #22
akersten wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then he'll claim that he's being censored even more, which is probably exactly what he wants to do to rile up his supporters.

except his supporters won't know about it since he is censored.

The President can call a press conference at any moment that will get coverage from pretty much every national media outlet, especially any outlet likely to be frequented by his supporters. Presidents will never be without a method to communicate with their supporters.

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

#459

Post by sneak »

rbanffy wrote: post #418
sneak wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Forget Twitter, and substitute “gmail deliverability”? Without that, you cannot run a business.

Do you need Twitter to interact with your bank? To pay your taxes? To buy groceries? Is it the only way you have to reach your family?

When my Twitter account was suspended recently after 12 years, I also lost access to my DM history, including usernames which I had not memorized.

For some of my friends, Twitter was the only contact information I had for them. I have now totally lost the ability to communicate with those friends in the midst of a global emergency, even if I make a new account (which itself would be subject to immediate termination at any time), because I don’t know their usernames.

A few of the closest ones fortunately noticed my absence without prompting, went to my profile, saw it suspended, went to my website (I presume it helped that my username, @sneakdotberlin, describes my website address), and emailed me. As for the busier or less attentive friends? No word yet. :(

You can’t export your data or do “data takeout” from a suspended account, sadly, and you can’t view your DM history either inbound or outbound.

EDIT: Also, I do need Twitter (and a high follower count) to meaningfully interact with my bank or my airline’s (or Google’s) customer service department. The 1-800-i’m-a-schnook line doesn’t seem to get things done.

Post reply on HN