Trump threatens to crack down on social media platforms

[BmorePat87]

(05-28-2020, 02:13 PM)GMDino Wrote:

If I’m reading this correctly, the EO claims tech platforms are doing something they’re not, in violation of an incorrect interpretation of law, and tasks agencies it can’t task to look into the things that aren’t being done that wouldn’t be wrong. Anything I missed, @Klonick? https://t.co/7daROPSRvd

— Tiffany C. Li (@tiffanycli) May 28, 2020

https://kateklonick.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/DRAFT-EO-Preventing-Online-Censorship.pdf

Closing accounts that violate their TOS and adding fact checkers to posts is in no way similar to willfully editing content to change the merits of it in a way that could create a legal issue (defamation, harassment, etc). 

This is a stupid suggestion for how to reinterpret section 230, but this is the man who got out of paying numerous contractors by draining them in legal fees. It's his hope to turn this into a long legal battle that platforms will be unwilling to engage, forcing them to just do nothing rather than try to enforce some standards on their platforms. 

hopefully they do not cave to this legal gibberish. 

https://www.eff.org/issues/bloggers/legal/liability/230

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

Here's where Trump haters run into problems. Just because he's a buffoon doesn't mean he's always completely off point. Social media has protections based on the assumption that they are a platform for the views of others, not a content creator. If you are a platform then you need to be an equal opportunity platform, much like the baker who was censured for not making a gay wedding cake your rules must apply equally. If you are not enforcing terms of service in an equal manner than you are, by definition, discriminating, something I think we can all agree is wrong. That this is actually happening has been demonstrated on numerous occasions; e.g. person reports tweet flaming men and said tweet is not censured. Same person tweets exact same quote replacing "men" with "women" and is censured. I absolutely understand that there is a human element to this but I think there is a very credible argument to be made that TOS is not equally applied on many social media platforms.

[GMDino]

(05-28-2020, 04:02 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Here's where Trump haters run into problems.  Just because he's a buffoon doesn't mean he's always completely off point.  Social media has protections based on the assumption that they are a platform for the views of others, not a content creator.  If you are a platform then you need to be an equal opportunity platform, much like the baker who was censured for not making a gay wedding cake your rules must apply equally.  If you are not enforcing terms of service in an equal manner than you are, by definition, discriminating, something  I think we can all agree is wrong.  That this is actually happening has been demonstrated on numerous occasions; e.g. person reports tweet flaming men and said tweet is not censured.  Same person tweets exact same quote replacing "men" with "women" and is censured.  I absolutely understand that there is a human element to this but I think there is a very credible argument to be made that TOS is not equally applied on many social media platforms.

A broken clock is right twice a day.  Trump is like a slow clock that is right every couple years.

I haven't read anything that said he can do this or that he's even close to right in his "reasoning".

Trump only cares about himself...that's is why he wants to use his position as POTUS to try and force things he isn't legally allowed to force based on his complete misunderstanding of law.  IF Twitter and "censored" a democrat he'd be heaping praise.  Just like with the Flynn decision...if it was something that was going to be used for every case it would have some weight but it won't be.  

One doesn't have to a "hater" to simply point out he's being petulent and  wrong.  Again.

[*Nately120*]

(05-28-2020, 04:02 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Here's where Trump haters run into problems.  Just because he's a buffoon doesn't mean he's always completely off point.  Social media has protections based on the assumption that they are a platform for the views of others, not a content creator.  If you are a platform then you need to be an equal opportunity platform, much like the baker who was censured for not making a gay wedding cake your rules must apply equally.  If you are not enforcing terms of service in an equal manner than you are, by definition, discriminating, something  I think we can all agree is wrong.  That this is actually happening has been demonstrated on numerous occasions; e.g. person reports tweet flaming men and said tweet is not censured.  Same person tweets exact same quote replacing "men" with "women" and is censured.  I absolutely understand that there is a human element to this but I think there is a very credible argument to be made that TOS is not equally applied on many social media platforms.

There is a human element to it, which is why the concept of the president using a private social media site as his main way of addressing the populace he is sworn to serve (those he hasn't blocked, at least) is downright wacky.

Also, I'll admit I know nothing about Twitter, but I'd assume they are biased towards the rich and influential like everyone else. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(05-28-2020, 04:17 PM)Nately120 Wrote: There is a human element to it, which is why the concept of the president using a private social media site as his main way of addressing the populace he is sworn to serve (those he hasn't blocked, at least) is downright wacky.

I think even the bulk of Trump supporters would prefer he lay off twitter.

Quote:Also, I'll admit I know nothing about Twitter, but I'd assume they are biased towards the rich and influential like everyone else. 

I don't think it's a stretch at all to say that tech companies have a left leaning bias.  They're largely based in the bay area and being left leaning is close to compulsory in most of urban CA.  Anecdotally I was at a party with my then girlfriend and someone there started spouting off about the evils of gun ownership.  My girlfriend basically pleaded with me not to respond to them because of how it would be received.  I should note this was her work party, my personal friends have a rather more liberal (in the classic sense of the term) bent.

It's how this bias expresses itself in enforcing TOS that causes problems.  It's demonstrably an issue and pretending it's not actually adds fuel to Trump's allegations.

[NATI BENGALS]

(05-28-2020, 04:02 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Here's where Trump haters run into problems. Just because he's a buffoon doesn't mean he's always completely off point. Social media has protections based on the assumption that they are a platform for the views of others, not a content creator. If you are a platform then you need to be an equal opportunity platform, much like the baker who was censured for not making a gay wedding cake your rules must apply equally. If you are not enforcing terms of service in an equal manner than you are, by definition, discriminating, something I think we can all agree is wrong. That this is actually happening has been demonstrated on numerous occasions; e.g. person reports tweet flaming men and said tweet is not censured. Same person tweets exact same quote replacing "men" with "women" and is censured. I absolutely understand that there is a human element to this but I think there is a very credible argument to be made that TOS is not equally applied on many social media platforms.

I thought the standard line of thought was something like if you don’t like the way a business operates take your business elsewhere.

An executive order after having his bullshit flagged is a snowflake move.

[hollodero]

(05-28-2020, 04:02 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Here's where Trump haters run into problems.  Just because he's a buffoon doesn't mean he's always completely off point.  Social media has protections based on the assumption that they are a platform for the views of others, not a content creator.  If you are a platform then you need to be an equal opportunity platform, much like the baker who was censured for not making a gay wedding cake your rules must apply equally.  If you are not enforcing terms of service in an equal manner than you are, by definition, discriminating, something  I think we can all agree is wrong.  That this is actually happening has been demonstrated on numerous occasions; e.g. person reports tweet flaming men and said tweet is not censured.  Same person tweets exact same quote replacing "men" with "women" and is censured.  I absolutely understand that there is a human element to this but I think there is a very credible argument to be made that TOS is not equally applied on many social media platforms.

There might be some truth to that. But then again, I feel it should not be overlooked that if Trump were a normal twitter user, he'd be banned long time ago. Not based on his political views, but based on his conduct.

In that sense I find it hard when Trump complains. Twitter gave him quite the platform and quite a free range to tweet whatever message.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(05-28-2020, 05:13 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: I thought the standard line of thought was something like if you don’t like the way a business operates take your business elsewhere.

I'd generally agree, but when there's a monopoly such a move is difficult.  We're not talking about a local business, we're talking about platforms that service the entire planet.  Also, as previously stated, these businesses have legal protections under the assumption that they are platforms for discourse, not content creators.  In order to adhere to that you must, by definition, apply TOS adherence on an equitable basis. 

Quote:An executive order after having his bullshit flagged is a snowflake move.

You could view it as such, if you so choose.  Alternatively, one could view it as forcing them to adhere to the terms they agreed to operate under.  Neither point of view is 100% demonstrably wrong.  I suppose it depends on your personal point of view, no?

[*Nately120*]

(05-28-2020, 04:36 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I think even the bulk of Trump supporters would prefer he lay off twitter.


I don't think it's a stretch at all to say that tech companies have a left leaning bias.  They're largely based in the bay area and being left leaning is close to compulsory in most of urban CA.  Anecdotally I was at a party with my then girlfriend and someone there started spouting off about the evils of gun ownership.  My girlfriend basically pleaded with me not to respond to them because of how it would be received.  I should note this was her work party, my personal friends have a rather more liberal (in the classic sense of the term) bent.

It's how this bias expresses itself in enforcing TOS that causes problems.  It's demonstrably an issue and pretending it's not actually adds fuel to Trump's allegations.

I think the issue isn't that Trump posts right wing stuff so much as he posts incendiary bullshit.  So much of his popularity comes from being this unsavory asshat and pissing people off that it's hard to take any of his moaning over being picked on seriously. 

[Vas Deferens]

(05-28-2020, 04:36 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I think even the bulk of Trump supporters would prefer he lay off twitter.


I don't think it's a stretch at all to say that tech companies have a left leaning bias.  They're largely based in the bay area and being left leaning is close to compulsory in most of urban CA.  Anecdotally I was at a party with my then girlfriend and someone there started spouting off about the evils of gun ownership.  My girlfriend basically pleaded with me not to respond to them because of how it would be received.  I should note this was her work party, my personal friends have a rather more liberal (in the classic sense of the term) bent.

It's how this bias expresses itself in enforcing TOS that causes problems.  It's demonstrably an issue and pretending it's not actually adds fuel to Trump's allegations.

Call me crazy, but I think the leader of the free world should be fact checked.  This would be a completely different conversation if the label had been placed on something that wasn't demonstrably false.  

I remember a time when the GOP was all about the Free Market and not getting involved in private business concerns.  That group probably say, we'll we can just buy build our own social media.

New GOP only likes the free market when convenient.  Case in point, broadband accessibility.  Interesting that the GOP has been so adamantly behind stifling competition and outright barring new entrants who could give internet access to un / underserved populations and drive down prices for everyone. 

While I think this is a silly attempt at getting his base all riled up against twitter and diverting from the fact that he's a con-man, Twitter / F*ckbook are partially to blame for not beating him down much earlier.  He's painted himself into a corner and will be blasting off even crazier shit knowing they'll be timid to call him out.    

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(05-28-2020, 05:17 PM)hollodero Wrote: There might be some truth to that. But then again, I feel it should not be overlooked that if Trump were a normal twitter user, he'd be banned long time ago. Not based on his political views, but based on his conduct.

Oh, absolutely 100% agreed.  As much as we'd like to pretend there are special rules for certain people there are and the POTUS is definitely one of those people.

Quote:In that sense I find it hard when Trump complains. Twitter gave him quite the platform and quite a free range to tweet whatever message.

Trump, yes.  We agree on this.  Other right leaning users, not so much.   

[hollodero]

(05-28-2020, 05:41 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Trump, yes.  We agree on this.  Other right leaning users, not so much.   

Twitter CEO Dorsey himself admits that twitter has a left leaning bias. So I guess I won't contradict that.

I just wonder if that really leads to significant "shadow banning" or unequal censorship that is actually relevant. Trump seems to find quite a lot of right leaning users to retweet, and some of those tweets are pretty distinct. He found a vid that said "only a dead democrat is a good democrat"; he found fake videos of dutch right-wing extremists, most of all he finds people that support him, talk "Obamagate" and slam the "Russia hoax" pretty much on a daily basis. If this stuff is still up there, I can't really believe there is a concentrated effort to cleanse twitter from right leaning users.

What I can easily imagine though is that more right leaning and inappropriate content is reported (compared to left-leaning inappropriate content), since more users might be left leaning.

[BmorePat87]

(05-28-2020, 04:02 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Here's where Trump haters run into problems. Just because he's a buffoon doesn't mean he's always completely off point. Social media has protections based on the assumption that they are a platform for the views of others, not a content creator. If you are a platform then you need to be an equal opportunity platform, much like the baker who was censured for not making a gay wedding cake your rules must apply equally. If you are not enforcing terms of service in an equal manner than you are, by definition, discriminating, something I think we can all agree is wrong. That this is actually happening has been demonstrated on numerous occasions; e.g. person reports tweet flaming men and said tweet is not censured. Same person tweets exact same quote replacing "men" with "women" and is censured. I absolutely understand that there is a human element to this but I think there is a very credible argument to be made that TOS is not equally applied on many social media platforms.

I agree that Twitter should, but I’d also add that it’s a platform that’s dominated by conservative political users and foreign government bots who currently see value in supporting American conservatives.

Add in the fact that being banned has itself become a meme and a badge of honor for conservative twitter leading to accounts intentionally violating the TOS to claim that distinction.

It’s the perfect storm for seeing more conservatives banned or suspended, and it’s partially manufactured.

I would like to see progressives fact checked, though.

[Belsnickel]

(05-28-2020, 04:02 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Here's where Trump haters run into problems. Just because he's a buffoon doesn't mean he's always completely off point. Social media has protections based on the assumption that they are a platform for the views of others, not a content creator. If you are a platform then you need to be an equal opportunity platform, much like the baker who was censured for not making a gay wedding cake your rules must apply equally. If you are not enforcing terms of service in an equal manner than you are, by definition, discriminating, something I think we can all agree is wrong. That this is actually happening has been demonstrated on numerous occasions; e.g. person reports tweet flaming men and said tweet is not censured. Same person tweets exact same quote replacing "men" with "women" and is censured. I absolutely understand that there is a human element to this but I think there is a very credible argument to be made that TOS is not equally applied on many social media platforms.

Here's my argument with this, though. I want these rules applied equally. The problem is that right now, based on the current political climate, even if as objective an approach as you could code were applied the efforts would disproportionately impact right-wing posters. They literally discovered this at Facebook while researching a policy to apply and then shelved it for this reason. This isn't to say that lefties don't come up with some whack-a-doodle shit, we all know they do, but the current climate is with the right-wing pumping out more dis and misinformation so they would have more actions taken against them.

[Belsnickel]

(05-28-2020, 06:55 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I agree that Twitter should, but I’d also add that it’s a platform that’s dominated by conservative political users and foreign government bots who currently see value in supporting American conservatives.

Add in the fact that being banned has itself become a meme and a badge of honor for conservative twitter leading to accounts intentionally violating the TOS to claim that distinction.

It’s the perfect storm for seeing more conservatives banned or suspended, and it’s partially manufactured.

I would like to see progressives fact checked, though.

Right there with you.

[GMDino]

(05-28-2020, 07:16 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Here's my argument with this, though. I want these rules applied equally. The problem is that right now, based on the current political climate, even if as objective an approach as you could code were applied the efforts would disproportionately impact right-wing posters. They literally discovered this at Facebook while researching a policy to apply and then shelved it for this reason. This isn't to say that lefties don't come up with some whack-a-doodle shit, we all know they do, but the current climate is with the right-wing pumping out more dis and misinformation so they would have more actions taken against them.

I shared the Pence lifting empty boxes video in a group on Facebook and it was "flagged" as false.  Yet when I see a post about Clinton's kill count it is left alone.  I got a kick out of that.

[Dill]

(05-28-2020, 12:07 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I don't think it would get to a court.  I can't think of a mechanism he could use to have it shut down or threaten it.  He has as much authority as I do as far as that's concerned.  

I'm thinking the last thing Trump really wants is to see Twitter shut down.

That's his primary outreach--especially now that the COV-19 pressers don't go over well.  

It's also his primary tool for managing news cycles.

This message board would immediately register the giant vacuum in gaslight without those rage tweet cycles.

He doesn't like the fact checking, though. He has incentive to manage that as he would manage contractors he couldn't pay.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(05-28-2020, 04:02 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Here's where Trump haters run into problems. Just because he's a buffoon doesn't mean he's always completely off point. Social media has protections based on the assumption that they are a platform for the views of others, not a content creator. If you are a platform then you need to be an equal opportunity platform, much like the baker who was censured for not making a gay wedding cake your rules must apply equally. If you are not enforcing terms of service in an equal manner than you are, by definition, discriminating, something I think we can all agree is wrong. That this is actually happening has been demonstrated on numerous occasions; e.g. person reports tweet flaming men and said tweet is not censured. Same person tweets exact same quote replacing "men" with "women" and is censured. I absolutely understand that there is a human element to this but I think there is a very credible argument to be made that TOS is not equally applied on many social media platforms.

No shoes, no shirt, no service.

Why?

Because the shoeless and the shirtless aren’t protected classes. Neither are liars.

Trump doesn’t have a right to use Twitter. If he wants to spread false allegations of murder, he can do it at his local tanning salon.

[GMDino]

(05-29-2020, 04:24 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: No shoes, no shirt, no service.

Why?

Because the shoeless and the shirtless aren’t protected classes. Neither are liars.

Trump doesn’t have a right to use Twitter. If he wants to spread false allegations of murder, he can do it at his local tanning salon.

I just posted in the 2020 Election thread about this.  Listening to a podcast today and they reinforced that Trump gets away with things because he is Trump.  Essentially the defense is that you can't take what he says seriously becuase he always lies and makes stuff up about people he doesn't like.  Since it doesn't reach the level of slander we just have to ignore him.  

We have to ignore the POTUS because he always lies and makes stuff up.

That's where we are.

And 40% of voters still believe and support him.  Apparently 60% are "haters".  

[GMDino]

Twitter has placed this over the attached tweet from DJT.

You have to click through to read it.

....These THUGS are dishonoring the memory of George Floyd, and I won’t let that happen. Just spoke to Governor Tim Walz and told him that the Military is with him all the way. Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts. Thank you!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 29, 2020