Trump sues Face Book, Twitter and Google for censorship of American People

[Arjuna]

Trump sues Facebook, Twitter, Google for ‘censorship of the American people’

 

[SonOfSun]

Bwahahahahahaha... Might as well add another loss to the Trump resume.

 

[Bigfoot]

ORANGEMAN GOOD

 

[Bananabandit]

ORANGEMAN GOOD

Still better than Syracuse University sports.

 

[JaguarJaguarGolf]

No Standing….. Mis filed…. No Injury….

Take your pick

 

[Darth]

Private corporations.

</thread>

 

[spat]

Private corporations.

</thread>

You spelled monopolies wrong.

 

[Acer-m14]

i wonder how much FB, Google , Twitter , even YouTube got free $$$ from the Govt ..

 

[drowhawk]

Still wasting taxpayer resources even after being ousted from office.

It's the conservative way.

 

[meketrefe]

Private corporations.

</thread>

Exactly! .. he has no case.

..... However there is a parallel debate of how information is managed in to indiscriminately and sometimes illicitly manipulate public opinion in matters that are fundamental to the nations and public interest of a nation.
That wo counting the multiple privacy laws and or rights being exploited and violated.

They will say we agree to the terms and conditions but it is not 100% true.

 

[Darth]

Exactly! .. he has no case.

..... However there is a parallel debate of how information is managed in to indiscriminately and sometimes illicitly manipulate public opinion in matters that are fundamental to the nations and public interest of a nation.
That wo counting the multiple privacy laws and or rights being exploited and violated.

They will say we agree to the terms and conditions but it is not 100% true.

As a private company you are free to post, not post, and allow others to post and not post whatever you want on your platform.

The day someone argues otherwise is the day I would like a 75ft tall naked Hillary statue erected on their front lawn.

 

[ProgSpear]

Ya’ll explain how Ma Bell got busted, then tell me about all the tech giants, and how protected they are from any litigation. Exacltly what is the difference? Oh, could it be that they are a bunch of corporate lefties instead of a bunch of corporate righties? The real difference is that the lefties really hated corporatism when they were behind the curve, and pushed the whole rule of law thing to break them, but now that they are ahead of the curve, the rule of law doesn’t mean so much.

 

[spat]

As a private company you are free to post, not post, and allow others to post and not post whatever you want on your platform.

The day someone argues otherwise is the day I would like a 75ft tall naked Hillary statue erected on their front lawn.

In a corporofacist society, how do you tell the difference between a public and a private company ?


The line between these companies and government is getting very blurry.


Also, once a monopoly exists, then a free market doesn't. Once that happens all the foundations of libertarian philosophy fail to apply.

 

[Phazer]

Private corporations.

</thread>

If your company is indeed a completely private entity, then it should act in accordance with laws that regulate private companies. However, if your business utilizes governmental protections not afforded to all private entities, then you are not a totally private business and you are subject to rules regulating public entities.

 

[Grimscale]

As a private company you are free to post, not post, and allow others to post and not post whatever you want on your platform.

This is true.

But if you delete SOME content, but allow others to go through, you are no longer just a content provider, you have become an editor.
this should have immediately eliminated their Section 230 protections, but 'society' has allowed these people to so expand Section 2A that they can, effectively, do whatever they want and get away with it.
And, since these monopolistic platforms effectively control the flow of information on the Internet, even calls for restrictions on these groups go unheard.

They broke up Ma Bell because it got too big. Why have these companies not been broken up similarly?

 

[Darth]

This is true.

But if you delete SOME content, but allow others to go through, you are no longer just a content provider, you have become an editor.
this should have immediately eliminated their Section 230 protections, but 'society' has allowed these people to so expand Section 2A that they can, effectively, do whatever they want and get away with it.
And, since these monopolistic platforms effectively control the flow of information on the Internet, even calls for restrictions on these groups go unheard.

They broke up Ma Bell because it got too big. Why have these companies not been broken up similarly?

Again, wehere do people get this idea that they cannot delete *some* content?

They can allow and delete what they wish. Just like this site can.