President Trump Will Sign Executive Order on Social Media Censorship

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

Quote

 

President Donald Trump will sign an executive order on social media censorship amid rapidly intensifying political bias from the Silicon Valley Masters of the Universe.

White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany told reporters aboard Air Force one that the president will shortly sign the executive order, although no further details were given about what it will consist of.

 

Quote

 

This comes after Trump warned social media companies that continued political bias would lead to action from the administration.

“Republicans feel that Social Media Platforms totally silence conservatives voices,” said the President on Twitter earlier today. “We will strongly regulate, or close them down, before we can ever allow this to happen.”

 

https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2020/05/27/president-trump-will-sign-executive-order-on-social-media-censorship/

 

This is a tough one. Twitter likely should be regulated as a publisher, as they are no longer a mere social media site but a curator of news and with a very serious slant, so shouldn't reap the benefits of a public platform, but Trump should understand the short term vindictiveness that's come over him over the last 24 hours is basically a gift to the left who want more government intrusion into business operations. Trump's known about this for the last several years, and had time to move to a better platform. Instead, we're now in election season with the predicted election interference attempts by big tech, and all Trump can do is threaten EO's. 

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

Not that this will go anywhere in Congress..

 

 

Quote

 

Exclusive: Matt Gaetz Drafting Bill to Drop Big Tech’s Legal Immunity over One-Sided ‘Fact Checks’

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) will announce today that he is working with Republican members of the House Judiciary Committee to craft legislation that would strip social media giants of their Section 230 legal immunity if they fact check content on their platforms, according to a copy of his podcast which Breitbart News exclusively obtained.

On the Florida conservative’s podcast, Hot Takes with Matt Gaetz, he said that he is working on a bill that would prevent social media giants such as Facebook, Twitter, and Google from fact-checking content on their platforms. Gaetz’s announcement follows as Twitter decided to fact check President Donald Trump’s tweet on Tuesday.

Twitter tried to fact check the president over Trump’s tweet, claiming that mail-in ballot would lead to increased voter fraud.

 

 

https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2020/05/27/exclusive-matt-gaetz-drafting-bill-to-drop-big-techs-legal-immunity-over-one-sided-fact-checks/

[Dashinka 24,496]

I am fine with Trump as well as others exposing these social media platforms for what they are, but there is no need for additional laws, just stop using them.  I have, and it feels great!  Maybe Trump should stop using Twitter for at least a month, maybe more.

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

Right? What happened to the principled conservative? All I see right now from "conservatives" on social media are leftist pandering and monetizing grievance politics. I've yet to see prominent voices complaining about Twitter just go to other platforms. Such a simple solution yet seemingly impossible. So it either becomes cowardice and/or depravity. If you wonder why the left have gotten their way so much, look to spinelessness like this on a larger scale.

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

Trump finally moves.

 

Quote

 

Trump signs social media executive order that calls for removal of liability protections over 'censoring'

Flanked by Attorney General Bill Barr, President Trump signed an executive order in the Oval Office on Thursday that interprets Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 (CDA) as not providing statutory liability protections for tech companies that engage in censorship and political conduct.

The president's order, which also cuts federal funding for social media platforms that censor users' political views, came just two days after Twitter took the unprecedented step of slapping a "misleading" warning label on two of Trump's tweets concerning the fraud risks of nationwide mail-in balloting. The move immediately backfired: Experts disputed that Trump's tweet was actually misleading, in part because mail-in balloting has been linked to ongoing fraud; Twitter's fact-check itself contained false statements; and Twitter failed to apply the standard of review to other users.

At Thursday's signing ceremony, Trump called the fact-check "egregious," and held up a photo of Twitter executive Yoel Roth, who heads up the site's fact-checking and rules-making operation. Fox News reported on Wednesday that Roth has mocked Trump supporters, called Trump's team "ACTUAL NAZIS," slammed "scary trannies" in New York City, and called GOP Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell a "bag of farts." (In a statement, Twitter did not dispute Fox News' reporting, but called it "unfortunate.")

"My executive order calls for new regulations under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act to make it so that social media companies that engage in censoring any political conduct will not be able to keep their liability shield," the president said.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-signs-executive-order-on-social-media-companies

 

Long overdue. Twitter should be treated as a publisher if it wants to impose political bias and not a neutral platform free from liability and other benefits/protections other companies don't receive. 

 

Twitter also would've never grew their platform if this sort of partisan censorship was their norm, along with Facebook et al. Glad someone with a spine is finally fighting it.. though Trump should've done this long ago.

Edited May 28, 2020 by Burnt Reynolds

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

 

 

Naturally, likening Trump to Hitler with a fake photo is whats a clear dog whistle to left extremists --- importantly, Twitter has no desire to censor this stuff:

 

 

But Twitter will censor Trump, Gaetz, etc.

Quote

 

Twitter Censors Rep. Matt Gaetz for ‘Glorifying Violence’ … Against Antifa!

Twitter censored a post from Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) after he suggested that Antifa terrorists should be treated in the same ways as Middle Eastern terrorists. Gaetz responded sharply, tweeting “Feels good to virtue signal now twitter. But this will be hard to explain later. See you in the Judiciary Committee.”

“Now that we clearly see Antifa as terrorists, can we hunt them down like we do those in the Middle East?” asked Gaetz.

 

https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2020/06/02/twitter-censors-rep-matt-gaetz-for-glorifying-violence-against-antifa/

 

It's already politically targeted and no doubt this desire to forcefully interfere in elections will become more prominent now that the general campaign season has started. 

[Ban Hammer 13,337]

knowing trump, he did that with the bible for a reason - we just don't what it is yet but i would not be surprised if it has something to do with twitter.

(twitter - a site named after something feathered animals with bird brains do)

Edited June 2, 2020 by Ban Hammer

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

Facebook has only partially capitulated to the left's desire to censor views they disagree with.. it's yet another boycott of the platform, weird how with all the boycotts they've done that they still apparently have accounts. 

 

 

 

Alas, they couldn't explain why banning people they disagree with was a civil rights issue relevant to using their identity as "civil rights leaders", never mind explain the paradox of someone's civil rights of censoring others.

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/02/civil-rights-leaders-stunned-after-call-with-zuckerberg.html

 

All they could do is say that Trump's vocal rants against the rioters was actually against the "protesters" and that it's somehow suppressing minority voters. 

 

One thing I'm waiting for, overall, is some GOP people with a spine to actually leave both platforms and join one that utilized Twitter/Facebook's TOS for their first 10+ years. I don't get why this isn't even something to try. 

[Dashinka 24,496]

Maybe social media should be completely shut down given its role in the recent lawlessness.

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

One can't help but find this funny, yet worrisome and depressing:

 

Quote

 

Michelle Malkin Censored by Twitter for Supporting the Use of Force Against Violent Criminals

Far-left Twitter, which has refused to take down posts on its platform coordinating looting in American cities, as well as posts encouraging riots and violence, has now censored conservative author and commentator Michelle Malkin for supporting the use of force against violent criminals.

“In case I wasn’t clear: violent criminal looters should be shot,” said Malkin in a tweet posted on May 29.

Twitter has now temporarily locked Malkin out of her account until she deletes the tweet. Even though the tweet simply calls for the lawful use of force in the face of unprovoked violence, Twitter says it is somehow a violation of the platform’s “violent threats policy.”

 

Quote

In 2019, Twitter warned Malkin that her posts on the platform were in violation of the Sharia law system of Pakistan.

https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2020/06/03/michelle-malkin-censored-by-twitter-for-supporting-the-use-of-force-against-violent-criminals/

 

Key part on that last one, in case anyone forgets -- this is who Twitter caters to in 2016 and beyond.. why do these people even use this trash platform at all:

 

 

Also, after seeing Malkin in the news for over 20 odd years, she has to be around 50 or so by now, she doesn't seem to age, does she?

 

Edit: Apparently Malkin does use free speech platforms, not very often though, but clearly waiting for others to join as well, mainly all the other "conservatives" who regularly whine or monetize grievance politics while doing absolutely nothing to move the needle through their so-called "principles". The nature of cowards and virtue signalers is their refusal to take it on the chin even when they can easily benefit in the long term, albeit take a short term hit. 

Edited June 3, 2020 by Burnt Reynolds

[TBoneTX 45,288]

7 hours ago, Burnt Reynolds said:

Malkin in the news for over 20 odd years

She might have started when she was a zygote.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

On 5/28/2020 at 7:23 AM, Dashinka said:

I am fine with Trump as well as others exposing these social media platforms for what they are, but there is no need for additional laws, just stop using them.  I have, and it feels great!  Maybe Trump should stop using Twitter for at least a month, maybe more.

 

  Give up twitter? Are you saying signing an executive order and changing our nations laws to stop twitter from fact checking isn't the right response? 

 

  Does Trump really need to give up twitter when it's so easy to just change the laws to make it work for him? A more likely course of action will be another executive order to stop everyone else using twitter for 30 days. 

Edited June 4, 2020 by Steeleballz

[Dashinka 24,496]

5 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

  Give up twitter? Are you saying signing an executive order and changing our nations laws to stop twitter from fact checking isn't the right response? 

 

  Does Trump really need to give up twitter when it's so easy to just change the laws to make it work for him? A more likely course of action will be another executive order to stop everyone else using twitter for 30 days. 

Overall, I am fine with whatever Twitter and FB does since they are private companies, but when they start censoring/editing, they are crossing the line from a social media platform with a listed TOS, to a publisher and should not benefit from being shielded from libel laws.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

5 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

Overall, I am fine with whatever Twitter and FB does since they are private companies, but when they start censoring/editing, they are crossing the line from a social media platform with a listed TOS, to a publisher and should not benefit from being shielded from libel laws.

 

   I agree, however there is a difference between censoring and removing posts versus fact checking. 

 

   If you look at Trumps tweets from the last few days, I am sure you can see there may be an ulterior motive for not wanting to be fact checked. 

[Dashinka 24,496]

1 minute ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   I agree, however there is a difference between censoring and removing posts versus fact checking. 

 

   If you look at Trumps tweets from the last few days, I am sure you can see there may be an ulterior motive for not wanting to be fact checked. 

So, is Twitter fact checking everyone, or just one person, or folks with one political bent.  I don’t use Twitter, but I am sure there are quite a few posts regarding the false narrative regarding President Trump’s visit to the church the other day.  Is Twitter fact checking all of those?   Btw, the person at Twitter doing the “fact checking” has a very biased background himself.  You can probably guess which way he leans.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/twitter-exec-in-charge-of-effort-to-fact-check-trump-has-history-of-anti-trump-posts-called-mcconnell-a-bag-of-farts.amp