Section 230 isn't perfect but it remains the best approach that we've seen for dealing with a very messy internet in which there are no good solutions.
Check out the absolutely stunning amount of astroturfing being done by Jason Fyk's "Social Media Freedom Foundation". These always ramp up when he loses in court. Guess what happened on the 12th? @mmasnick@ericgoldman
https://t.co/8OkW9ePGOD
@elonMusk@support@x@MichaelEhline
Could you explain why you believe your First Amendment right to Freedom of Religion and Freedom of Expression without Government Interference, should override anyone else's First Amendment right to not Associate with you and your Speech on their private property?
@kurtes25@True_Zenith@Lormif1@ThinkingSapien@TheGreatestOfEE@JoeShmo08508044 Your First Amendment right to Freedom of Religion and Freedom of Expression without Government Interference, does not override anyone else's First Amendment right to not Associate with you and your Speech on their private property.
The term "Platform" has no legal significance. It’s a generic term.
For example, Twitter is the Publisher of a micro-blogging platform. Facebook Publishes a social media platform. YouTube publishes a video hosting platform.
@MCuvielloNews @Jedi_Doc99 @NickForVA @elonmusk@joerogan Yes it does! But not under section 230. You can severely edit content and claim to be a platform. If this is the new Public Square, they are stopping speech that would NEVER have been stopped in a genuine public square. Made up conflating of "disinformation." It is a discussion.
(2) the vehicle is operated in a manner that threatens to cause death or serious physical injury to the officer or others, and no other objectively reasonable means of defense appear to exist, which includes moving out of the path of the vehicle.”
Firearms may not be discharged at a moving vehicle unless:
(1) a person in the vehicle is threatening the officer or another person with deadly force by means other than the vehicle; or
https://t.co/OUccTUfRPQ
Facebook Publishes a social media platform.
Twitter Publishes a micro-blogging platform.
YouTube Publishes a video hosting platform.
4chan Publishes a imageboard platform.
The term 'Platform' has no legal definition or significance.
What point were you trying to make?
@DavidStonesFan@IronWolf1970@elonmusk No, either you are a bot with a bad algorithm or a human who needs to learn to read.
Your quote repeats exactly what my point was - that Elon needs to decide if X is to be a platform or a publisher. If the former then he cannot restrict speech merely because he doesn't like it.
The myth of “government censorship” on social media is everywhere... but what’s really behind it? A recent Tech Dirt podcast with @mmasnick and @noupside (author, Invisible Rulers) dives deep into how this narrative took hold.
https://t.co/IDRfF28mAP
Meanwhile, committees subpoena tech companies and researchers based on misleading data (“22 million censored tweets!”). Reality check: Stanford flagged ~2,700 tweets for review—not at government direction and most were ignored by platforms anyway.