In Sept 2019, government agent Kamala Harris Pressured Twitter to Infringe on President Trump’s First Amendment Rights
- Thread starter Phenomenally Frantastic
- Start date
For asking a corporation to enforce their terms of service? LOL
TOS that Trump and every other person on Twitter agreed to below.
Learn it, know it, live it.
x.com
TOS that Trump and every other person on Twitter agreed to below.
Learn it, know it, live it.
X Terms of Service
Read X's Terms of Service to understand the rules governing your access of all Twitter services.
x.com
It’s still not a good look for a government official to call (aka apply pressure of her government office/Senate seat).For asking a corporation to enforce their terms of service? LOL
TOS that Trump and every other person on Twitter agreed to below.
Learn it, know it, live it.
X Terms of Service
Read X's Terms of Service to understand the rules governing your access of all Twitter services.
The obvious retort is:
If _________ (high government figure I don’t like) calls _______ (any social media platform CEO) to remove/silence/lower algorithm of _________ (citizen of United States I do like). You, and any other American would not be in favor. The company should be free to interpret and apply their ToS without government interference, pressure, or even suggestion.
Can we start another poll?
Is OP
1) A political hack
2) Batshit crazy
3) all of the above
Is OP
1) A political hack
2) Batshit crazy
3) all of the above
So your view is the government should never be allowed to ask a platform to enforce their TOS or even correct inaccurate information?
Hard to dispute that well thought out retort.
She created no laws to ban his speech, she only asked that the platform followed it's terms of service.
The man is a National security threat every time he picks up his phone though. He's a babbling disaster, I want him to X all day long.
Yes.
Look at HBOT, full of inaccurate information. It’s social media too. Would it be cool if DJT, Biden, Kamala, anyone else to shut us down because there are occasional bewbs and constant inaccuracies??
“There's an old adage—spawned by former Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis in 1927—that the best way to counter speech one doesn't agree with is not with censorship but with more speech.”
Sadly ironic that trump was the one who ended up being shot as a result of her and Joe biden's rhetoric
Thanks for your response.
Brandeis made that statement almost 100 years ago, when in person speech and newspapers were the only means of mass communication.
Times have changed.
Under your standard, if the Twitters on the Internets are saying that a fire has closed an Interstate and to evacuate East, when factually the only evacuation route is West and if you head East you will die, the government may not contact Twitter and ask them to correct?
The government’s response is limited to what the state and local social media platforms can put out? And if people are confused by the mixed messages and some die, that’s just collateral damage?
That’s seems less than optimal and a danger to public safety.
I’m sorry, where in our system of government did we assign the duty of interpreting and enforcing corporate TOS?
Is that an executive function, to secretly tell social media companies to reduce the visibility of user posts, not for being inaccurate, but for not conforming to government preferred narratives?
Your hypothetical remains above where we’ve already slipped on the slope.
