5 ms·

What is the realistic legal recourse for those who were censored from pressure by the US government? Sue the relevant agencies or executive branch? Will anyone

What is the realistic legal recourse for those who were censored from pressure by the US government? Sue the relevant agencies or executive branch? Will anyone even go to prison or lose their job?

laidoffamazon 4y ago
None because there was no censorship or pressure.
- imwillofficial 4y ago
  This is demonstrably false. As admitted by the government itself.
  - laidoffamazon 4y ago
    Can you quote what explicit pressure was applied?
    - mindslight 4y ago
      [flagged]
    - imwillofficial 4y ago
      Go read the twitter files drops
      - ModernMech 4y ago
        I did and I’m missing the pressure. No one can seem to point it out too; when asked they either say “read the files”, or “when the FBI asks you to do anything it’s automatically a threat.” Still waiting for maybe a link to one of the tweets at least that people find so problematic.
        imwillofficial 4y ago
        I used to work for the FBI. Whenever I asked for something there was an understanding that it would happen. When is a question not a question?
        ModernMech 4y ago
        Very curious about your perspective as you seem to be the only one so far here who has said they worked for the FBI. What role did you have? Has anyone ever said "no" to a request? Were those requests lawful or were you asking others to do illegal things? If you did ever get a "no", was it your job or did you know of others whose job it was to exact revenge or to otherwise illegally coerce compliance? According to the Twitter Files, Twitter itself said "no" to many requests. What was the ill-fate they met for saying "no" to the FBI? The way I see it, when you're a multibillion, multinational corporation that has a very powerful board of directors and an experienced legal team, saying "no" to a request from FBI is not only an option, it likely will have zero consequences. Other massive companies are able to say "no" to the FBI and are still in business. Does "come back with a warrant" not do the trick anymore?
        imwillofficial 4y ago
        I never saw any shady asks when I was there, but my field was different. Name dropping FBI got people to jump through whatever hoops 100% of the time. My bias may come from asking willing folks things that were legal. My point was simply that when you come in with that kind of authority, people often just follow orders and don’t push back. That’s a powerful stick to wield and should be wielded responsibly. In my review of the twitter files, this was not done in every case.
- goatlover 4y ago
  That's not true.
myko 4y ago
> Will anyone even go to prison or lose their job? Why would they? This is another nothingburger, Musk is just seeking attention for the sake of attention. If that means echoing antivax bullshit, or trying to make sure Hunter Biden's penis is available for all to see on the internet, that's what he will do.
- innocentoldguy 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - myko 4y ago
    [flagged]
- andrew_ 4y ago
  Ro Khanna, the Congressman representing S.V. has thoughts on using "nothingburger": > Here’s why I think the “nothingburger” argument is compounding the problem. https://www.thefp.com/p/ro-khanna-on-twitter-free-speech https://www.thefp.com/p/ro-khanna-on-twitter-free-speech It's worth a read to at least consider his thoughts.
  - myko 4y ago
    I have read his thoughts, and while he makes good points he ignores the clear facts: - censoring Hunter Biden's nudes from the site was the right thing to do. - The laptop hoax had all the hallmarks of Russian disinformation, and still seems likely to have been developed by the Russian government - banning trump was the right thing to do, he had just attempted a coup against the US (I also think banning dictators/autocrats would be the moral thing to do) The other thing people are ignoring is that trump's team requested things to be removed, and they were as well: https://www.businessinsider.com/twitter-granted-requests-from-trump-white-house-biden-remove-posts-2022-12 https://www.businessinsider.com/twitter-granted-requests-fro... Everyone is acting like Twitter favored progressive causes, they did not. In fact we know from the Twitter files nothingburgers that Twitter gave "LibsOfTikTok" _favorable_ handling, preventing them from being properly moderated without higher levels of approval than other accounts. Con accounts were treated with kid gloves to prevent the backlash that Twitter is receiving anyway.
meowtimemania 4y ago
If the government pressures a platform to censor information I would think that goes against freedom of speech or maybe freedom of the press
kodyo 4y ago
There isn’t a legal recourse. Nobody will go to jail. Nobody will lose their jobs. Trust will continue to deteriorate.
denlekke 4y ago
probably best to consult a lawyer to determine which laws, if any, were broken and if you have standing to sue i, a non-lawyer, think you probably have no recourse

What is the realistic legal recourse for those who were censored from pressure by the US government? Sue the relevant agencies or executive branch? Will anyone even go to prison or lose their job?

laidoffamazon 4y ago

None because there was no censorship or pressure.

imwillofficial 4y ago
This is demonstrably false. As admitted by the government itself.
- laidoffamazon 4y ago
  Can you quote what explicit pressure was applied?
  - mindslight 4y ago
    [flagged]
  - imwillofficial 4y ago
    Go read the twitter files drops
    - ModernMech 4y ago
      I did and I’m missing the pressure. No one can seem to point it out too; when asked they either say “read the files”, or “when the FBI asks you to do anything it’s automatically a threat.” Still waiting for maybe a link to one of the tweets at least that people find so problematic.
      - imwillofficial 4y ago
        I used to work for the FBI. Whenever I asked for something there was an understanding that it would happen. When is a question not a question?
        ModernMech 4y ago
        Very curious about your perspective as you seem to be the only one so far here who has said they worked for the FBI. What role did you have? Has anyone ever said "no" to a request? Were those requests lawful or were you asking others to do illegal things? If you did ever get a "no", was it your job or did you know of others whose job it was to exact revenge or to otherwise illegally coerce compliance? According to the Twitter Files, Twitter itself said "no" to many requests. What was the ill-fate they met for saying "no" to the FBI? The way I see it, when you're a multibillion, multinational corporation that has a very powerful board of directors and an experienced legal team, saying "no" to a request from FBI is not only an option, it likely will have zero consequences. Other massive companies are able to say "no" to the FBI and are still in business. Does "come back with a warrant" not do the trick anymore?
        imwillofficial 4y ago
        I never saw any shady asks when I was there, but my field was different. Name dropping FBI got people to jump through whatever hoops 100% of the time. My bias may come from asking willing folks things that were legal. My point was simply that when you come in with that kind of authority, people often just follow orders and don’t push back. That’s a powerful stick to wield and should be wielded responsibly. In my review of the twitter files, this was not done in every case.
goatlover 4y ago
That's not true.

myko 4y ago

> Will anyone even go to prison or lose their job? Why would they? This is another nothingburger, Musk is just seeking attention for the sake of attention. If that means echoing antivax bullshit, or trying to make sure Hunter Biden's penis is available for all to see on the internet, that's what he will do.

innocentoldguy 4y ago
[flagged]
- myko 4y ago
  [flagged]
andrew_ 4y ago
Ro Khanna, the Congressman representing S.V. has thoughts on using "nothingburger": > Here’s why I think the “nothingburger” argument is compounding the problem. https://www.thefp.com/p/ro-khanna-on-twitter-free-speech https://www.thefp.com/p/ro-khanna-on-twitter-free-speech It's worth a read to at least consider his thoughts.
- myko 4y ago
  I have read his thoughts, and while he makes good points he ignores the clear facts: - censoring Hunter Biden's nudes from the site was the right thing to do. - The laptop hoax had all the hallmarks of Russian disinformation, and still seems likely to have been developed by the Russian government - banning trump was the right thing to do, he had just attempted a coup against the US (I also think banning dictators/autocrats would be the moral thing to do) The other thing people are ignoring is that trump's team requested things to be removed, and they were as well: https://www.businessinsider.com/twitter-granted-requests-from-trump-white-house-biden-remove-posts-2022-12 https://www.businessinsider.com/twitter-granted-requests-fro... Everyone is acting like Twitter favored progressive causes, they did not. In fact we know from the Twitter files nothingburgers that Twitter gave "LibsOfTikTok" _favorable_ handling, preventing them from being properly moderated without higher levels of approval than other accounts. Con accounts were treated with kid gloves to prevent the backlash that Twitter is receiving anyway.

meowtimemania 4y ago

If the government pressures a platform to censor information I would think that goes against freedom of speech or maybe freedom of the press

kodyo 4y ago

There isn’t a legal recourse. Nobody will go to jail. Nobody will lose their jobs. Trust will continue to deteriorate.

denlekke 4y ago

probably best to consult a lawyer to determine which laws, if any, were broken and if you have standing to sue i, a non-lawyer, think you probably have no recourse