2 ms·

If you don't have the power to take down lies[0], you can't be held responsible for them. That's what Section 230 is supposed to do. [0] Who is deciding what i

If you don't have the power to take down lies[0], you can't be held responsible for them. That's what Section 230 is supposed to do. [0] Who is deciding what is a lie and what isn't? Too often, what appears to be a lie to someone is someone else's lived experience. The internet doesn't have an oath. Social network randos aren't obligated to post the truth.

jqpabc123 4y ago
If you don't have the power to take down lies[0], you can't be held responsible for them. LOL! Thank you for illustrating my point. The first victims of any such mandate will be the ultra-partisans promoting this case --- they have zero tolerance for dissent. Do you honestly think Truth Social will continue to operate without Trump having the ability to ban and remove people and posts he disagrees with? He is very definition of intolerant --- the only tolerance he has any interest in is that afforded himself. The job for this biased court will be to craft a decision that impacts one side but not the other. I'm skeptical that this can be achieved in a fair and consistent and workable manner.