3 ms·
Someone that spends too much time at the bar might mistake that for the town square, as might someone who spends too much time on Twitter. The more foolish asp
by SllX 6y ago
Someone that spends too much time at the bar might mistake that for the town square, as might someone who spends too much time on Twitter.
The more foolish aspect of this is that the President doesn’t have a direct means of striking back against what Twitter actually did (post a Get the Facts link), so he’s trying to punish them by reinterpreting Section 230. This EO definitely has some teeth, but there are provisions in it that I can’t wait to see in court.
- nautilus12 6y agoIs he reinterpreting 230? I've seen both sides of the spectrum say that social media companies have been interpreting 230 too broadly
- SllX 6y agoYes.[1] Section 230 is not a new law, but this order is directing his Administration how they are to interpret certain provisions of it going forward with some actions they are to take. It’s important to remember that an Executive Order is not law by decree, it is an official government communication directing the government how to act under the law, as is the President’s prerogative. No matter how you come down on the issue of how social media companies interpret Section 230, a new EO is effectively a new interpretation either narrowing, expanding or changing the scope under which enforcement action is to be taken by the government. [1] https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-preventing-online-censorship/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-or...
- epakai 6y agoHe's continuing a push from Republicans to reframe section 230 immunity as only applying to "neutral" platforms [1]. The problem is this then gives the government a big stick to control them on relatively subjective grounds. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230_of_the_Communications_Decency_Act#Platform_neutrality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230_of_the_Communicati...