Skip to comments.President Trump Should Strip Social Media Companies Of Section 230 Immunity.
Posted on 08/20/2018 5:42:13 AM PDT by Enlightened1
President Trump should introduce legislation stripping all socialism media companies of their section 230 immunity. What do I mean by this? Please read below.
Since the tech companies are trying to have it both ways where on one hand they are censoring conservatives, promoting Democrats in their social media algorithms, but at the very same time they have public square immunity under federal law from what people post to their web sites. The Tech Left are saying they can do whatever they want when it comes to censorship. However, if you have public square immunity from federal law, then you cannot at the very same time censor conservatives and promote Democrats. President Trump simply needs to make it so that Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, etc.. can no longer have immunity to third party posts. Thus, social media will no longer be treated as public platforms or the modern public square where people can say what they want, but treated as Publishers. Again this is since social media giants want to censor what is being said on their web sites. The Tech Left are trying to have it both ways, and you cannot. You fall under one category or the next.
This above is an easy way to make everyone play by the same rules. If you make a billion dollar as these tech companies do, then say they are liable for all content posted on their web sites like a Publisher. The funny part is the Tech Left for years have been arguing they are just a public platform and they cannot be held accountable. However, since they are now openly and actively censoring people it is time to strip away their section 230 immunity. Section 230 is part of the Digital Millennium Copyright act, and it holds that platforms are not liable for content posted by third parties to their websites.
It would be great if social media were neutral forums. However, since they are not neutral forums then we have a problem. Since the algorithms are rigged to favor Democrats and Leftists the Justice Department must open an investigation into the social media companies to determine if the algorithms are an in kind election contribution. For instance, if you own Billboard, then you cannot give that Billboard to a political candidate. That is known as in kind contribution, and there are contribution limits. Thus, if you like a candidate and you donate the maximum money. You then cannot go put out a bunch of commercials for that candidate. This is because you already maxed out giving money to the candidate. What these tech companies are doing by rigging the algorithms is the functional equivalent of giving a candidate free billboards and TV ads.
The above is the key for President Trump to stop the tech left election engineering and rigging. President Trump should have the DOJ send subpoenas to all these social media companies a notice to preserve all evidence, and a notice to preserve all documents. If they fail to do this, hide information, etc then they can go to prison under federal laws for tampering with evidence and documents. Furthermore, President Trump can send them notices of anti-trust, election meddling and election fraud, Federal Elections Commission and to the Anti-Trust commission.
The tech companies have made a bet. They believe the Democrats are going to win the House of Representatives in November of 2018. If this happens, then they are off the hook. This is because they will not have Mark Meadows, Jim Jordan, Matt Gaetz and others to hold them accountable since the Democrats would be in control. They believe as long as they help the Democrats they are free and clear. This is why President Trump needs to send out the notices to preserve evidence, subpoena them and open a criminal investigation for election meddling, election engineering and illegal in kind campaign contributions made by social media giants. This is all in clear violation of campaign finance laws.
This is the Tech Left Coup. Remember Dinesh D'souza was investigated, charged and sent to prison over giving 20k to a friend through alleged shell donors, then why is there no investigation into the in kind contributions? Remember too the new Black Panthers got investigated for standing outside of voting centers with clubs to intimidate voters. Although Holder let them go. Anyhow, these are the Democrats blocking everyone and intimidating everyone.
So when Twitter and Facebook rig their platforms so that Democrat content goes to the top of the pile, that is the functional equivalent of giving someone a free commercial. Thats a clear campaign contribution of billions of dollars.
Great idea. I wish someone could get this idea to the President. Otherwise, it looks like the Social Media companies are setting themselves up for a huge lawsuit. Since they are monopolistic, that would be a good idea. BTW, what positive function does Facebook really provide? I see our country much more divided since this mega company sprung up out of nowhere. It produces conflict, not harmony. I would love to see someone get them in court and explain what their true mission statement is, and what the actual results of their efforts are.
Excellent post. Someone needs to get this to POTUS.
Seems like a good approach.
Might be some unintended consequences that should be thought through / anticipated, always worth discussing.
Great post and even a greater idea......it needs to happen.
“””””””””””I see our country much more divided since this mega company sprung up out of nowhere. It produces conflict, not harmony.””””””””””””””””
One thing I learned about Facebook, it allowed me to connect with friends and relatives I hadn’t heard from in years. And I learned that many of them are still assholes which is why I lost contact with them to begin with.
Very interesting post.
The “in kind” contribution makes much sense.
The only problem is the TECH COMPANIES probably wouldn’t understand it.
As far as getting this to President Trump somebody with a Twitter account needs to send it.
"Twitter lets you know that complete strangers are a-holes. Facebook lets you know friends and family are a-holes."
Dont fall for that. If they do that to Facebook they will do it to Free Republic. Bad idea.
FWIW, I don’t favor this approach. If the Feds want to go after social media for sonething, better bet would be going through the SEC. See if the companies are conning shareholders.
From your keyboard to the inbox at the Oval Office.
Perhaps a good first start is to stop calling these companies social media. Instead, we just call them socialist media....
I think Trump is working on it. He made at least 3 tweets about it over the weekend that I haven’t seen posted here.
Bad solution. This will invite and excuse their censorship even more, and they will continue to censor conservatives while letting the left off the hook. Actually, the consequences will fall more heavily on small conservative outfits, just as happened with broadcasting’s fairness doctrine. Do we want FR declared a social media site?
A better approach is mandatory disclosure of biased routines and conservative migration to alternate sites. Such migration will take time, but the result will be more freedom for us.
The real problem is to get the DOJ to cooperate.
With Sessions in charge, who knows?
One thing I learned about Facebook, it allowed me to connect with friends and relatives I hadnt heard from in years. And I learned that many of them are still assholes which is why I lost contact with them to begin with.
Social Media is not very social.
How does this section 230 square with the HUD lawsuit against Facebook for housing discrimination? We had a thread on that here yesterday, based on a Don Surber article.
Question: How would this affect FreeRepublic???
bad analogy. There is a huge difference between a message board which FR is and a vast social media network.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.