Posted on 05/27/2020 4:37:25 PM PDT by RandFan
@JackPosobiec
BREAKING: President Trump to sign Executive Order on Social Media Censorship
---
Developments to follow (if any) Developing story...
(Excerpt) Read more at twitter.com ...
The telcom infrastructure is 90% owned by AT&T, Verizon and Centurylink. They have the fiber, switches and routers.
They also own some media companies.
But MSM owns jack.
Just saw FCC Commissioner on Tucker. Hell yes! It’s about time.
I'll leave it up to the legal scholars to fight it out, but you could be right.
Then again, FR presents itself as a "conservative" forum, just as DU is where the dummies hang out. Facebook, Twitter, etc., are essentially presenting themselves as open forums, mediums for all types to converse. They can't claim to be an open medium, a conduit of discussion, if they are constraining the discussion in a partisan manner. They are taking place in the discussion at that point.
Well, that's a good question.
The White House has some clever lawyers. Be interesting to see the details of what they have come up with ..,
It will definitely be tested in the courts. Can it hold up?I dont know. Probably not.
Still it raises a lot of noise and maybe will stop Big Tech bombarding the soccer mom with CNN talking points. I think this is what has alarmed Trump and his campaign so much the fact that they were referring people on his twitter to fact checking by..CNN and Bezos’s WaPo ..
I want to see Laura Loomer Triumphant!
Then ravage them with truth until they cry like little girls.
Remember how that judge made some ruling about how the president couldn’t block people or something like that? - I wonder if there is some sort of reciprocity or that ruling has set it up for the Supreme to sing us another hit of “We Run the Country, Haha, You Lose!” featuring John Robert with Ginsberg on life support.
If just having a platform run by a conservative would be an echo chamber, then what is Twitter? A platform run by a conservative that is open to all different points of view provided that the rules of the forum against personal attacks, profanity and other forms of abuse would be just the thing. It’s what Twitter is supposed to be, but is not. Free Republic is supposed to be an echo chamber, not a platform. Leftard trolls are zotted as a matter of policy. Echo chambers are important. That’s where we can put our heads together and figure out exactly what it is that we believe. But confining ourselves to an echo chamber alone would make us overly smug because we are not challenged.
We gave Dorsy a chance to be a neutral platform where opposing world views meet and clash. Same with Facebook, Google and You Tube. And they could not do it. What they have is fraud, an echo chamber pretending to be a neutral platform. They failed. Our turn. We must find ourselves a rich MAGA man, and get him on board.
The stupid leadership at Twitter could not resist their leftists leanings and tried to tweak the nose of the President. As Julia Roberts said in Pretty Woman: “Big mistake, big, huge!”
How does a Federal judge force a user of a private business to stop blocking people who are harassing him?
Examine that for your answer.
"judge" Naomi Reice Buchwald [a Rapin Bill Resistance judge from SD New York] ruled that Trump couldn't block targeted harassers - a behavior that is against Twitter rules.
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals [an appeals court centered in the New York area that is mostly in the hands of the Resistance] affirmed that the Federal bench can run Twitter how it pleases.
A three-judge panel on the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, in New York, ruled unanimously that targeted harrassment is A-OK if they say so - even if it's TOTALLY against Twitter rules.
Two Baby Bush squishes from the Second Circuit [Barrington Parker Jr. the Third and Peter W. Hall], and a Clownbammy "judge" [Christopher F. Droney, who thankfully bailed from the Federal Appeals bench at the young age of 65] to top it all off.
None of these ignorant buffoons has the slightest idea how social media in general, and Twitter in particular, work.
They've never gotten their hands dirty with computers if they're over a "certain age".
Buchwald is 75, Barrington is 76, Hall is 71 and Droney is 65.
We used to mock people like these when I was in IT - making decisions about technology without having any idea how it works.
Their grandchildren know more about it.
“whats to stop them if Twtter can do it”
No they cannot.
The carriers have a different set of rules and it would require a court order.
We do know of Nazi and Jihadi sites that have been booted by their hosting providers. But noting is stopping them from purchasing their own hosting infrastructure, registering a domain name and leasing a 500mbs circuit into the internet.
Any of the carriers would be happy to lease them that 500mbs line.
I was put in “time out” on FascistBook for using the word “tranny.” And it wasn’t an auto mechanical reference.
Actually I do know, I just used the term common carrier in the old fashion POTS sense to avoid getting too technical. The old POTS system didn’t care much what you said or what your politics were they just carried your electrons so whatever said was said. Consider the modern telephone service - the cell service. These “social media” services have evolved to where they’re just a more entertaining version of your cell service. Currently they certainly share customer data with the cell services and soon will be one in the same. Given that, they have no business implementing any form of censorship. They shouldn’t care what words, pictures ideas are said & used just Granddaddy POTS didn’t. They’re there to push photons or electrons and nothing more.
Ah, so government regulation is ok if ‘we’ do it. Got it.
Yes it should, real fast.
Well, I guess FR should never be allowed to ban liberals again. And DU conservatives. I’m not a fan of government meddling in what private companies do.
FaceBook is a required medium for access to many sites. So is Linked In. If this were not the case, then they would have a case for a right to censor.
You can’t marginalize certain groups of a particular mindset on essential public forums.
I’ve seen this site purge many over the years. Was all that wrong? Or is it only ok when ‘our’ side does it?
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.