Twitter slams a public interest notice on Trump’s tweet after he signs the EO

4
395

Following the President’s signing of an executive order to target social media, Twit­ter early Fri­day at­tached a pub­lic-in­ter­est no­tice to a tweet from Mr. Trump. The tweet is about the vi­o­lent protests in Min­neapolis in re­sponse to the death of George Floyd while in po­lice cus­tody. The so­cial-me­dia com­pany said the tweet vi­o­lated its rules about glo­ri­fy­ing vi­o­lence but al­lowed users to ac­cess it via a link.

He didn’t glorify violence. That’s absurd.

Twitter doesn’t feel the need to attack any foreign leader anywhere in the world. They clearly intend to just attack the President. Twitter is vengeful and childish. They are picking political sides while trying to call themselves a public square.

While I don’t believe in regulating free speech, including social media, in this case, it brings the issue to a head. What the President is saying is Congress must address Section 230 and until then, the government will regulate. Unfortunately, this could cause more censorship, but the fact is Twitter censors only find the right. They do nothing about the terrorists and the Chinese Communist Party on their platform. They have people like Kathy Griffin spewing hate and telling people how to kill the President. This fight has been brewing for a long time and it needs to be addressed.

This is how the President’s tweet looks:

When you click ‘view,’ it looks like this:
This is the full tweet, which can’t be shared:

Unfunny comedian Kathy Griffin, who instructed people on how to kill Trump only days ago, is thrilled.

Popular Twitter personality, Carpe Donktum, wrote, Thugs (of all colors) are burning down Minneapolis and liberal nutcases are cheering on twitter. But Twitter censors and removes an OFFICIAL COMMUNICATION from the President of the United States about the National Guard moving in TO PROTECT CITIZENS You just sealed your fate

A CNN host responded, falsely claiming “thugs” is a racially-loaded word.

We have been told by the left that we are not allowed to use the word any longer. However, “thugs” does not refer to people of color, it refers to people acting violently, like gangsters. It’s race-baiting nonsense.

“Thugs, thugs, thugs,” and “Charlottesville” are trending on Twitter. The crazy left is rooting for the violent protesters burning down Minneapolis. Twitter is giving its hardcore leftist buddies a platform. It’s rare that something on the right trends on Twitter.

The Charlottesville lie is also back to damage the president.

Singling out the President’s tweets is aimed at destroying his presence online and the leftist trolls are cooperating with vicious tweets in response.

REACTIONS TO THE EXECUTIVE ORDER

The Executive Order signed by the President on Thursday targets Section 230 which exempts social media platforms from liability. However, the President says they cease to be a neutral platform and are now publishers.

In a post late Thursday, Twitter described the executive order as “a reactionary and politicized approach to a landmark law.” It said Section 230 protects innovation and freedom of expression, and that “attempts to unilaterally erode it threaten the future of online speech and Internet freedoms.”

Facebook on Thursday said that repealing or limiting section 230 would “restrict more speech online, not less” and “would penalize companies that choose to allow controversial speech and encourage platforms to censor anything that might offend anyone.”

Google also criticized the executive order on Thursday. “Undermining Section 230 in this way would hurt America’s economy and its global leadership on internet freedom,” a Google spokeswoman said in a statement. The company enforces its content policies without regard to political viewpoint, she said.

All of that would be true if they weren’t censoring people on the right.

THE ORDER

Speak­ing in the Oval Of­fice Thursday as he pre­pared to sign the or­der, President Trump ac­cused Twit­ter of act­ing as an ed­i­tor “with a view­point” and de­scribed the plat­form’s fact-check of his tweets as “po­lit­i­cal ac­tivism.” He said he would delete his Twit­ter ac­count “in a heart­beat” if he felt the news me­dia were fair to him.

“We’re here to­day to de­fend free speech from one of the great­est dan­gers,” the pres­i­dent said. He ac­knowl­edged the or­der would likely be chal­lenged in court but said: “What isn’t?”

“In a coun­try that has long cher­ished the free­dom of ex­pression, we can­not al­low a lim­ited num­ber of on­line plat­forms to hand­pick the speech that Amer­icans may ac­cess and con­vey on­line,” the or­der says. “When large, pow­er­ful so­cial me­dia com­pa­nies cen­sor opin­ions with which they dis­agree, they ex­er­cise a dan­ger­ous power.”

The or­der lays the ground­work for treat­ing the plat­forms as places where in­di­vid­u­als’ First Amendment rights should be pro­tected, terming them “a 21st-cen­tury equiv­a­lent of the pub­lic square.”

The order sets up a number of ways for the government to attack when the administration sees as online censorship. It would scale back Section 230 and direct the Commerce Department to petition the Federal Communications Commission to set up a rule-making proceeding to clarify the scope of Section 230. A key focus of that proceeding would be to determine when platforms have failed to live up to their obligations to act in “good faith” under the law when they police content.

It’s not clear if this is legal.


PowerInbox
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
4 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments