- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Draft copy of Trump's executive order on Big Tech has been released
Posted on 5/28/20 at 9:03 am to DavidTheGnome
Posted on 5/28/20 at 9:03 am to DavidTheGnome
You really are low iq.
This isn’t the problem. They are more than welcomed to censor content they don’t like, as a private company, but they have to do it as a publisher and not a platform. I know posters have pointed this out to you so I don’t anticipate you recognizing the difference between platform and publisher. Either you are ignorant, willfully dishonest, or both
quote:
And now will happen even more
This isn’t the problem. They are more than welcomed to censor content they don’t like, as a private company, but they have to do it as a publisher and not a platform. I know posters have pointed this out to you so I don’t anticipate you recognizing the difference between platform and publisher. Either you are ignorant, willfully dishonest, or both
0
Posted on 5/28/20 at 9:04 am to Old Hellen Yeller
quote:They don’t have to. They can either choose to be an unbiased platform or they can choose to be a publisher and suffer the liabilities that come with that.
You seem to think that this will somehow reduce censorship.
If social media companies are now going to be responsible for anything and everything posted on their platforms, get ready for the opposite.
Posted on 5/28/20 at 9:05 am to crazy4lsu
quote:
If companies can be held liable for what their users post, this absolutely would lead to much heavier moderation of user-posted content.
Gone are the wild west days of calling Michelle Obama a tranny.
Posted on 5/28/20 at 9:05 am to crazy4lsu
quote:
If companies are liable for what their users post, it seems likely that they would more heavily moderate these forums.
Can’t believe more people don’t see this
Posted on 5/28/20 at 9:07 am to DavidTheGnome
quote:You mean like banning anyone on the right? Already happening.
Goodbye free and open internet,
The question here is; who should have the freedom of speech? Twitter, Facebook, Google or it's users?
Posted on 5/28/20 at 9:08 am to crazy4lsu
quote:
If companies are liable for what their users post, it seems likely that they would more heavily moderate these forums
Or they can be a free and open platform and keep those protections
Posted on 5/28/20 at 9:09 am to DavidTheGnome
quote:
Oh good, big government here to save the day from private companies. Damn those libs!
youre too dumb.
quote:
will re-establish a tool to help citizens report cases of online censorship.
quote:
a social media platform uses deceptive policies to moderate content and if its policies are inconsistent with its terms of service.
nothing wrong with ensuring citizens can effectively file complaints, working to reduce inconsistent/deceptive policies action. its kinda like enforcing recall lists on defective products. social media companies don't have to create an unacceptable product that is detrimental to the speech of some.
libs are now all about them loopholes, but muh gun show loophole, muh censorship loophole!!!
Posted on 5/28/20 at 9:10 am to crazy4lsu
quote:Of course it will. Holding providers responsible for someone else's actions is a terrible idea.
If companies can be held liable for what their users post, this absolutely would lead to much heavier moderation of user-posted content.
But, let's be honest. This is just Trump blustering. Congress isn't going to repeal the DMCA anytime soon. And Trump can't do it himself.
Posted on 5/28/20 at 9:11 am to Contra
quote:What's fun to watch are leftists that backed "Net Neutrality" under the guise of the FCC being awesome will have huge problems with the power of the FCC being used to regulate their favorite platforms.
The executive order would require the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to propose and clarify regulations
Posted on 5/28/20 at 9:12 am to Esquire
quote:
quote:
If companies can be held liable for what their users post, this absolutely would lead to much heavier moderation of user-posted content.
Gone are the wild west days of calling Michelle Obama a tranny.
This is sort of a convoluted (possibly unintended) admission if what this is all about.
Posted on 5/28/20 at 9:12 am to Bourre
quote:
Or they can be a free and open platform and keep those protections
Again, what does that mean in practice? If a user gets banned from a platform for breaking the terms of service, which explicitly bans certain types of speech, is the platform free and open or is it a publisher? What is the effect then of Miami Herald vs Tornillo, in the case they are publishers?
This post was edited on 5/28/20 at 9:14 am
Posted on 5/28/20 at 9:14 am to DavidTheGnome
quote:
Private companies shouldn’t be the arbiters of truth, that’s the governments job!
Your argument is really silly...
Either they perform as platforms and enjoy the freedoms that they currently enjoy OR they fall under regulations as with any other publisher in this country...
Why do you think it is fair for one publisher to have rules and the other be allowed to operate without rules?
Posted on 5/28/20 at 9:15 am to DavidTheGnome
quote:
And now will happen even more, dip shite.
Maybe, or maybe not at all. These companies will have to decide whether they are a platform, or a publisher, instead of saying they are a platform, but acting as a publisher.
If they say they are a publisher, they can ban and demonetize to their hearts content. They can also face lawsuits regarding their content.
If they say they are a platform, and act as a platform, they can enjoy the protections of a platform.
Then the people can decide which they want to use.
Posted on 5/28/20 at 9:16 am to Contra
quote:
The draft order also requires the Attorney General to establish a working group including state attorneys general that will examine the enforcement of state laws that prohibit online platforms from engaging in unfair and deceptive acts.
I’m sure our Attorney General will get right on this.
Posted on 5/28/20 at 9:16 am to Old Hellen Yeller
quote:We do see it. Conservatives are already seeing this right now. Basically Trump is forcing their hand to either play by the rules for both sides or start censoring everyone. How can YOU not see it?
Can’t believe more people don’t see this
Posted on 5/28/20 at 9:17 am to troyt37
quote:
If they say they are a publisher, they can ban and demonetize to their hearts content. They can also face lawsuits regarding their content.
If they say they are a platform, and act as a platform, they can enjoy the protections of a platform.
So a "platform" can't ban a user for any reason? I'm trying to understand this distinction in practice.
Posted on 5/28/20 at 9:17 am to troyt37
quote:
If they say they are a publisher, they can ban and demonetize to their hearts content. They can also face lawsuits regarding their content.
Which they will, hooray
TD posts news stories and also lets users post. Are they a platform or a publisher? There are certain topics they ban users for, oh no. Should TD be open to lawsuits and implement a much heavier censorship policy? This is where it’s heading just give it time. The shortsightedness of those chearing this on is gonna bite them all in the arse soon enough.
This post was edited on 5/28/20 at 9:20 am
Posted on 5/28/20 at 9:21 am to crazy4lsu
Yes they can under their terms of service. What they can’t do is ban or censor a certain political group or views just because they don’t agree with that view.
Posted on 5/28/20 at 9:21 am to crazy4lsu
quote:
So a "platform" can't ban a user for any reason? I'm trying to understand this distinction in practice.
Surely you aren't going to be as willfully ignorant as Davidthetroll.
Have you seen anything in this entire thread that says a platform can't ban for any reason? No? Guess why.
Posted on 5/28/20 at 9:23 am to crazy4lsu
quote:
So a "platform" can't ban a user for any reason? I'm trying to understand this distinction in practice
That’s the problem. In practice, for years the social media giants have acted as publishers. If you want an idea of how a platform should act in practice, I think 4chan and Parler may be better examples of platforms
This post was edited on 5/28/20 at 9:25 am
Page 5 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News