Update
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Kamala harris will prosecute social media account holders for hate speech .

That is suppression of free speech and they spread lies that Trump wants to destroy democracy. 🤔
Ontheroad · M
I've not heard that but I'm all for it... hate, misinformation and lies need to go away. Free speech isn't free and and if you spread hate, lies and willfully spread misinformation, you need to pay the price.
Vin53 · M
@BigGuy2 Ohhhhhh....sorry, the word is DISTRACTION...
BigGuy2 · 31-35, M
@Vin53 ... tut tut

🤔 ... get back in the basement
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
Ontheroad · M
I find it interesting, to say the least, how people defend lies and misinformation.

The old and quite tired line of "who decides what is a lie/misinformation" is just that, old and tired.

A fact is a fact, all else is a lie or misinformation.

A fact is provable, a lie isn't.

Those who argue against this... yeah, it tells me all I need to know about them.
OriginalDumbMan · 36-40
@Ontheroad how can media platform be held accountable? They don’t post anything, people there account holders post.
Ontheroad · M
@OriginalDumbMan they can take down posts and ban repeat offenders. Algorithm's work wonder to catch liars and misinformation. A business, any business.

Not talking about the harmless B.S. artists, just those who post with intent to defraud, cause unrest, incite violence or harm, etc.
@OriginalDumbMan asks
how can media platform be held accountable?
You've got it backwards!!

News organizations - publishers - can be held accountable for libel and/or defamation. Why not social media platforms - that's the real question here!

And the answer is Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.
Section 230(c)(2) provides immunity from civil liabilities for information service providers that remove or restrict content from their services they deem "obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected", as long as they act "in good faith" in this action.
Source: wikipedia.

Translation: Social media platforms don't have the same responsibilities as publishers, but they do have some responsibilities to uphold federal law by removing federally illegal content. And they also have to uphold their posted terms of service.

As you may or may not be aware, social media platforms are for-profit businesses, and they set terms of service designed to attract and keep customers. Those terms of service have nothing to do with the US Constitution.

You can create a social media platform that only allows discussion of activities of pet cats, and removes all non-cat discussion. The Constitution has no say over cat oriented social media.
tindrummer · M
This is utter bs. Don't post it if you can't prove it.
Maybe you got her and orange crush mixed up.
OriginalDumbMan · 36-40
@tindrummer https://x.com/charliespiering/status/1831677164372082751?s=46.
This message was deleted by its author.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
LadyGrace · 70-79
Definitely is. 👍
OriginalDumbMan · 36-40
@Pitchblue I don’t have it now . Will have to do some digging. Search for elon musk on x. Youtube is getting heavily regulated.
OriginalDumbMan · 36-40
@Pitchblue https://x.com/charliespiering/status/1831677164372082751?s=46
@OriginalDumbMan That link doesn't support your claim, Not at all. That link says
In 2019, Harris vowed to use the DOJ and law enforcement to 'hold social media platforms responsible' for 'misinformation' as part of the 'fight against this threat to our Democracy'

A platform is NOT an account holder. Did you know that?
@RachelLia2003 that's not how free speech works buddy. blocked.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
Vin53 · M
OriginalDumbMan · 36-40
@Vin53 last time elon broke the twitter when libs where getting out of hands.
Vin53 · M
@OriginalDumbMan Theres nothing musk can do that would ever effect me
Lots of leftist talk about criminalizing "misinformation." And, of course, they also want to be the entity that makes the decisions as to what is or isn't misinformation. So, you could actually go to jail for saying something the gov't doesn't like. Where have we heard that horror story before?
Kwek00 · 41-45, M
Meanwhile, in the real world,

And we don’t want to stifle anything. We certainly don’t want to stifle free speech, but that’s no longer free speech. See, I don’t think that the mainstream media is free speech either because it’s so crooked. It’s so dishonest.

So, to me, free speech is not when you see something good and then you purposely write bad. To me, that’s very dangerous speech and you become angry at it. But that’s not free speech.


- Donald J. Trump, Social Media Summit, 12th of July 2019

SOURCE: https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-presidential-social-media-summit/
Reason10 · 70-79, M
Like I said, DEMONAZIS
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
This comment is hidden. Show Comment

 
Post Comment