The Federal Elections Commission should be doing something.
This should be simple, immediate, and inarguable.
The FEC, the FCC, and the FTC should issue the following order
No social media platform can edit, alter, or censor the official candidate or official campaign account
Any action taken against either candidate or campaign will result in a $100 BILLION fine.
Not joking abut the $100B fine either. In fact, make it $100 Trillion.
NO CANDIDATE FOR OFFICE, of any party, should have their official account or official campaign account censored by any employee of a private company. Period. End of discussion.
THE FIRST AMENDMENT IS NOT SUBJECT TO A FUCKING TERM OF SERVICE
Such endorsements and censorship should be counted as in-kind contributions to a campaign
Yes, the distinction between PLATFORM (enjoying 230 liability protections) and PUBLISHER.
They should be held legally liable for the child porn, the illegal drug trafficking, the human trafficking, the facilitating communication by enemies of the United States.
This is true, but should be inarguable. But, the 230 protection also render no Standing to even potential litigation where a claim could be made that harm was made and facilitated through the network (e.g., harm/loss/death that came from bullying). They are currently protected from any and all allegations (mostly civil) that could also be brought to bear would drain these companies of their resources. Yes, their pile of treasure might bear that out now, but (again) these companies would have never "made it" without these protections being afforded to them from early stage until now. Protections that were afforded them by the US (the People); not their own TOS or some other national policy.
take it even further. Make income contributions by social media Giants illegal. Have the FCC rule that it is illegal for large social media companies to make in contributions to a campaign
have the FCC rule that political censorship is classified as an in-kind contribution. Because it is. if you sent her the supporters of one candidate or just have him since you're talking points of one party but not the other or you take action in a way that manipulates an election that should be counted as an in-kind contribution to a political campaign
endeavor under the FEC rules that would be illegal. subject to a 1 billion dollar fine..
how do you stop censorship. and I don't give a fuk about any arguments are there was. They proven they can't be left to their own devices.
Also, I am running for office, from now until forever. Since I'm banned from Twitter and banned from several reddits and 10minute hushed on many others.
Can I hold a rally for Clinton in your living room? Can I use your cell phone to campaign for Bernie?
Twitter is not "free speech", and you would never want it defined so narrowly. It's a company that's owned by private citizens. It is under no obligation to allow people to use its service when those people break the terms (contract) of that service. It would be the same if .WIN became huge, and all of sudden leftists demanded that because of "free speech" they be allowed to post here.
Twitter, Facebook, et. al. are absolutely allowed to discriminate with regard to the content they allow on their platform. It is their platform. It does not belong to you.
Twitter, Facebook, et. al. are absolutely allowed to discriminate with regard to the content they allow on their platform. It is their platform. It does not belong to you.
And discriminate, they damn well do. That's what we are opposing, here.
When Twitter flags an unedited video as "fake," but ignores multiple falsehoods, that is absolutely an assault on our First Amendment rights.
First, notice the downvotes. It's a new feature rolled out by the GODMODS, but it's telling.
Second, bruh...we are not talking about a banal commentary about a food recipe nor an invective-laced tirade about my random political opinions.
We are talking about our citizens qualified for and in the act of running for PUBLIC OFFICE.
FURTHER...
These PLATFORMS are granted LIABILITY PROTECTIONS from the US Government that without them these platforms would be literally sued out of existence. It's not a stretch to say that OUR PUBLIC OFFICIALS made and continue to make this platform/business possible. We maybe should think they could say, "Thank you" and then shut the fuck up and be on their way.
FURTHER...
These PLATFORMS are WELL QUALIFIED for public-square protections and should apply broadly to Political Speech for anyone.
There shouldn't be any doubt or discussion that these PLATFORMS should not impeded the access to or censor any publicly-qualified candidate (i.e, they have gotten the signatures of their tentative constituents and are in the act of running for office).
If you think I give a fuck about downvotes from dipshits who don't understand the law you have no idea who you're fucking with.
These PLATFORMS are granted LIABILITY PROTECTIONS from the US Government that without them these platforms would be literally sued out of existence.
No they wouldn't. Are you attorney? No, you aren't, and you have no idea what you're talking about.
These PLATFORMS are WELL QUALIFIED for public-square protections
No they aren't. They are private services. The only reason they are popular is because they are free. There is absolutely nothing public about them. They have the same rights as any other business, no matter how much you cry about it.
Ever wonder why nobody sues twitter for "censorship"? Use your head. They're completely within their rights to censor you all fucking day long, and for the rest of time. You do not have the right to use another person's property, violate the contract you agreed to when using it, and then complain about your "rights". Twitter is not your property. Facebook is not your property.
When you engage with twitter, at the point of "sale" you sign a contract that defines the terms and conditions of your usage of their service. They could come right out and say, "No anti-Democrat party sentiments" and it would be entirely within their rights to do so, just as on this website we can say no Democrats. The point is you signed a contract. If you didn't like the terms of the agreement, you shouldn't have signed. Facebook and twitter are not utilities. There are thousands of other ways to communicate of the internet. The internet is a utility. Facebook is not.
You need to put on your big boy pants and start "adulting", because you're acting like a child who has no idea about anything. This is the way the world works, and whether or not you like it, it's completely fair. You talk like a fucking commie when you complain about "big tech" and "muh government" needs to point guns at people for me to have my way. You may think you're a patriot but at best you're communism lite. You believe in the same shit they do.
I'm talking about people running for public office. And, the FEC and the FTC absolutely has something to say in how a private company is influencing our election process by censoring some and not others.
Further, there are PAID SERVICES that the Trump Campaign is being denied (for flimsy reasons, at best) while other candidates are being provided.
If you can't see the imbalance, then few people can help you.
It's private property, dipshit. You have no right to determine what facebook and twitter allow on their webstite. ZERO.
You faggots can cry all day long. You will NEVER get what you want, and thank god for it. Because if you can do it them, they can do it to you. You people are seriously fucking dumb and have zero foresight.
The Federal Elections Commission should be doing something.
This should be simple, immediate, and inarguable.
The FEC, the FCC, and the FTC should issue the following order
Not joking abut the $100B fine either. In fact, make it $100 Trillion.
NO CANDIDATE FOR OFFICE, of any party, should have their official account or official campaign account censored by any employee of a private company. Period. End of discussion.
THE FIRST AMENDMENT IS NOT SUBJECT TO A FUCKING TERM OF SERVICE
Yes, the distinction between PLATFORM (enjoying 230 liability protections) and PUBLISHER.
This is true, but should be inarguable. But, the 230 protection also render no Standing to even potential litigation where a claim could be made that harm was made and facilitated through the network (e.g., harm/loss/death that came from bullying). They are currently protected from any and all allegations (mostly civil) that could also be brought to bear would drain these companies of their resources. Yes, their pile of treasure might bear that out now, but (again) these companies would have never "made it" without these protections being afforded to them from early stage until now. Protections that were afforded them by the US (the People); not their own TOS or some other national policy.
take it even further. Make income contributions by social media Giants illegal. Have the FCC rule that it is illegal for large social media companies to make in contributions to a campaign
have the FCC rule that political censorship is classified as an in-kind contribution. Because it is. if you sent her the supporters of one candidate or just have him since you're talking points of one party but not the other or you take action in a way that manipulates an election that should be counted as an in-kind contribution to a political campaign
endeavor under the FEC rules that would be illegal. subject to a 1 billion dollar fine..
how do you stop censorship. and I don't give a fuk about any arguments are there was. They proven they can't be left to their own devices.
Fuck it yo, let's just nationalize facebook and have the government run it!
Yes!!!
Also, I am running for office, from now until forever. Since I'm banned from Twitter and banned from several reddits and 10minute hushed on many others.
Can I hold a rally for Clinton in your living room? Can I use your cell phone to campaign for Bernie?
Twitter is not "free speech", and you would never want it defined so narrowly. It's a company that's owned by private citizens. It is under no obligation to allow people to use its service when those people break the terms (contract) of that service. It would be the same if .WIN became huge, and all of sudden leftists demanded that because of "free speech" they be allowed to post here.
Twitter, Facebook, et. al. are absolutely allowed to discriminate with regard to the content they allow on their platform. It is their platform. It does not belong to you.
And discriminate, they damn well do. That's what we are opposing, here.
When Twitter flags an unedited video as "fake," but ignores multiple falsehoods, that is absolutely an assault on our First Amendment rights.
First, notice the downvotes. It's a new feature rolled out by the GODMODS, but it's telling.
Second, bruh...we are not talking about a banal commentary about a food recipe nor an invective-laced tirade about my random political opinions.
We are talking about our citizens qualified for and in the act of running for PUBLIC OFFICE.
FURTHER...
These PLATFORMS are granted LIABILITY PROTECTIONS from the US Government that without them these platforms would be literally sued out of existence. It's not a stretch to say that OUR PUBLIC OFFICIALS made and continue to make this platform/business possible. We maybe should think they could say, "Thank you" and then shut the fuck up and be on their way.
FURTHER...
These PLATFORMS are WELL QUALIFIED for public-square protections and should apply broadly to Political Speech for anyone.
There shouldn't be any doubt or discussion that these PLATFORMS should not impeded the access to or censor any publicly-qualified candidate (i.e, they have gotten the signatures of their tentative constituents and are in the act of running for office).
You are compare Apples to Screwdrivers.
If you think I give a fuck about downvotes from dipshits who don't understand the law you have no idea who you're fucking with.
No they wouldn't. Are you attorney? No, you aren't, and you have no idea what you're talking about.
No they aren't. They are private services. The only reason they are popular is because they are free. There is absolutely nothing public about them. They have the same rights as any other business, no matter how much you cry about it.
Ever wonder why nobody sues twitter for "censorship"? Use your head. They're completely within their rights to censor you all fucking day long, and for the rest of time. You do not have the right to use another person's property, violate the contract you agreed to when using it, and then complain about your "rights". Twitter is not your property. Facebook is not your property.
When you engage with twitter, at the point of "sale" you sign a contract that defines the terms and conditions of your usage of their service. They could come right out and say, "No anti-Democrat party sentiments" and it would be entirely within their rights to do so, just as on this website we can say no Democrats. The point is you signed a contract. If you didn't like the terms of the agreement, you shouldn't have signed. Facebook and twitter are not utilities. There are thousands of other ways to communicate of the internet. The internet is a utility. Facebook is not.
You need to put on your big boy pants and start "adulting", because you're acting like a child who has no idea about anything. This is the way the world works, and whether or not you like it, it's completely fair. You talk like a fucking commie when you complain about "big tech" and "muh government" needs to point guns at people for me to have my way. You may think you're a patriot but at best you're communism lite. You believe in the same shit they do.
I'm not talking about me, as a joe-schmoe user.
I'm talking about people running for public office. And, the FEC and the FTC absolutely has something to say in how a private company is influencing our election process by censoring some and not others.
Further, there are PAID SERVICES that the Trump Campaign is being denied (for flimsy reasons, at best) while other candidates are being provided.
If you can't see the imbalance, then few people can help you.
imagine arguing that Twitter and Facebook are equivalent to your living room lol
It's private property, dipshit. You have no right to determine what facebook and twitter allow on their webstite. ZERO.
You faggots can cry all day long. You will NEVER get what you want, and thank god for it. Because if you can do it them, they can do it to you. You people are seriously fucking dumb and have zero foresight.