4 ms·

Which executive order, can you cite or link it please?

delecti 5y ago
From https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=silence+and+cancel+twitter+executive+order https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=silence... https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/28/trump-targets-social-media-with-executive-order-after-twitter-fact-checks-him.html https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/28/trump-targets-social-media-w... I can't find a link to the order itself though.
- iammisc 5y ago
  If there's no link to the order (EOs being publicly available), then exactly what is the claim? The two things stated in the article about new rules around section 230, which does not match your original claim of > Trump signed an executive order to allow people to "silence and cancel" Twitter users after Twitter added a fact check to a single Tweet of his. Which 'people' did the EO allow to 'silence and cancel' Twitter users? Can you please explain yourself? Who was canceled? Can you name one person? Which person canceled them that was not allowed to before this EO? You've made quite the claim. Can you substantiate it?
  - delecti 5y ago
    I'm not the person who made that claim, I'm just linking articles discussing what the claim was in reference to.
    - iammisc 5y ago
      Ah sorry, then. Thanks for attempting to substantiate.
  - qkqk 5y ago
    It made major headlines, I'm surprised you're so far out of the loop you never heard about it. The link to a Google search I provided for you makes it easy to find the EO: https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-preventing-online-censorship/ https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/ex...
    - iammisc 5y ago
      I did hear about that order, but it did nothing of the sort the commenter claimed it did. It did not allow 'people' to 'cancel' other people. It asked the DOJ to investigate any violations of section 230, and asked the FCC to rework its administrative rules regarding the law. It did not suspend anything. Did not create new law. That is editorial nonsense.
      - qkqk 5y ago
        If you'd heard about it, you wouldn't need someone else to find cites or links, I'm not that gullible. > Did not create new law Right, it had no effect, just more signalling from Trump. He sought to increase the legal responsibility of social media companies for what their users say, exposing them to lawsuits, in effect silencing and canceling users.
qkqk 5y ago
Oh wow, you really didn't know? https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-preventing-online-censorship/ https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/ex... https://books.google.com/books?id=B1MzEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA259#v=onepage&q&f=false https://books.google.com/books?id=B1MzEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA259#v=on... https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-announcing-executive-order-preventing-online-censorship/ https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/re... https://www.google.com/search?&q=trump+executive+order+twitter https://www.google.com/search?&q=trump+executive+order+twitt...
- iammisc 5y ago
  The original comment said: > Trump signed an executive order to allow people to "silence and cancel" Twitter users after Twitter added a fact check to a single Tweet of his. Which people were allowed to silence and cancel others. The links you cite contain nothing of the sort. Rather they have to do with procedural rules around section 230. The only actual link is the second one, from the governmental archives. Your first link is an image of Trump signing an EO against anti-semitism. Unless you're in favor of anti-semitism, I'd personally feel ashamed of posting such a thing and claiming it's bad. But... to each his own. > My executive order calls for new regulations, under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, to make it that social media companies that engage in censoring or any political conduct will not be able to keep their liability shield. That’s a big deal. They have a shield; they can do what they want. They have a shield. They’re not going to have that shield. My executive order further instructs the Federal Trade Commission, FTC, to prohibit social media companies from engaging in any deceptive acts or practices affecting commerce. This authority resides in Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act. I think you know it pretty well. Most of you know it very well. I would think you know it quite well, right? EDIT: for those who read this later, the original commenter in his zeal to paint me out to be some ignoramus, posted this image of trump signing a purported EO on censorship that was actually one meant to combat anti-semitism. What drove him to do this... I cannot say. https://firstamendmentwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/2019-12-11T220729Z_1075986145_RC2ATD9WJ74R_RTRMADP_3_USA-TRUMP-min.jpg https://firstamendmentwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/2...

From https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=silence+and+cancel+twitter+executive+order https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=silence... https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/28/trump-targets-social-media-with-executive-order-after-twitter-fact-checks-him.html https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/28/trump-targets-social-media-w... I can't find a link to the order itself though.

iammisc 5y ago
If there's no link to the order (EOs being publicly available), then exactly what is the claim? The two things stated in the article about new rules around section 230, which does not match your original claim of > Trump signed an executive order to allow people to "silence and cancel" Twitter users after Twitter added a fact check to a single Tweet of his. Which 'people' did the EO allow to 'silence and cancel' Twitter users? Can you please explain yourself? Who was canceled? Can you name one person? Which person canceled them that was not allowed to before this EO? You've made quite the claim. Can you substantiate it?
- delecti 5y ago
  I'm not the person who made that claim, I'm just linking articles discussing what the claim was in reference to.
  - iammisc 5y ago
    Ah sorry, then. Thanks for attempting to substantiate.
- qkqk 5y ago
  It made major headlines, I'm surprised you're so far out of the loop you never heard about it. The link to a Google search I provided for you makes it easy to find the EO: https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-preventing-online-censorship/ https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/ex...
  - iammisc 5y ago
    I did hear about that order, but it did nothing of the sort the commenter claimed it did. It did not allow 'people' to 'cancel' other people. It asked the DOJ to investigate any violations of section 230, and asked the FCC to rework its administrative rules regarding the law. It did not suspend anything. Did not create new law. That is editorial nonsense.
    - qkqk 5y ago
      If you'd heard about it, you wouldn't need someone else to find cites or links, I'm not that gullible. > Did not create new law Right, it had no effect, just more signalling from Trump. He sought to increase the legal responsibility of social media companies for what their users say, exposing them to lawsuits, in effect silencing and canceling users.

qkqk 5y ago

Oh wow, you really didn't know? https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-preventing-online-censorship/ https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/ex... https://books.google.com/books?id=B1MzEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA259#v=onepage&q&f=false https://books.google.com/books?id=B1MzEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA259#v=on... https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-announcing-executive-order-preventing-online-censorship/ https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/re... https://www.google.com/search?&q=trump+executive+order+twitter https://www.google.com/search?&q=trump+executive+order+twitt...

iammisc 5y ago
The original comment said: > Trump signed an executive order to allow people to "silence and cancel" Twitter users after Twitter added a fact check to a single Tweet of his. Which people were allowed to silence and cancel others. The links you cite contain nothing of the sort. Rather they have to do with procedural rules around section 230. The only actual link is the second one, from the governmental archives. Your first link is an image of Trump signing an EO against anti-semitism. Unless you're in favor of anti-semitism, I'd personally feel ashamed of posting such a thing and claiming it's bad. But... to each his own. > My executive order calls for new regulations, under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, to make it that social media companies that engage in censoring or any political conduct will not be able to keep their liability shield. That’s a big deal. They have a shield; they can do what they want. They have a shield. They’re not going to have that shield. My executive order further instructs the Federal Trade Commission, FTC, to prohibit social media companies from engaging in any deceptive acts or practices affecting commerce. This authority resides in Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act. I think you know it pretty well. Most of you know it very well. I would think you know it quite well, right? EDIT: for those who read this later, the original commenter in his zeal to paint me out to be some ignoramus, posted this image of trump signing a purported EO on censorship that was actually one meant to combat anti-semitism. What drove him to do this... I cannot say. https://firstamendmentwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/2019-12-11T220729Z_1075986145_RC2ATD9WJ74R_RTRMADP_3_USA-TRUMP-min.jpg https://firstamendmentwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/2...