It’s not as good as occasionally getting served up a message instead of all his tweets, “this account is suspended until further notice,” but it’s a good first step.
And you know he’s going to blow a gasket when he finds out. I really hope this escalates all out of proportion.
But, but… I thought regulations were bad and were hurting the economy!!
But this is a matter of Free Speech! Twitter isn’t protecting his posts from criticism! He has a constitutional right to post without criticism! /s
The Ayatollah is going to declare a fatwa!
If this goes through, the First Dystopian Age will have begun in earnest.
I thought 1984 was like 36 years ago? smh, can’t they even do their shit on time?
Without Twitter Trump would dry-up.
“Dangerous power” = the only significant power he doesn’t have yet.
Without Trump Twitter would dry up!
Mandatory listening.
But the logic of Mr. Trump’s order is intriguing because it attacks the very legal provision that has allowed him such latitude to publish with impunity a whole host of inflammatory, factually distorted messages that a media provider might feel compelled to take down if it was forced into the legal role of a publisher that faced the risk of legal liability rather than a distributor that does not.
The entire current Administration needs to be microdosed.
GOOD. https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/28/politics/republicans-trump-senate-2020-trouble/index.html
This is from the end of the article and the last sentence…well, is it poorly-written, or is it just me?
"But what Republican professionals say would help immensely is if the President stuck to an encouraging message on bringing the country back from the pandemic.
" ‘When he does it right three days in a row, it really bumps his numbers,’ said Reed. ‘We need command performance on message discipline.’ "
Oooh, what would happen if he did it four days in a row? Scary!
It’s a nice thought, but… it’d still put a large portion of the internet (both mega companies like twitter and youtube and smaller outlets) out of business to force them into the role of publishers, and seriously break most of the outlets the rest of the population uses on a regular basis. I feel like there’s a lot more upside if we could just make fact-checking more of a norm, possibly with legal liabilities for fact-checking gone wrong…
Google news serves me with a heathy supply of fact checking stories. I find the African and the Indian fact checks to be intriguing because I am not familiar with any of the underlying premises, and and can therefore analyse the structure of the argument, without having to worry about whether the premises are true.
So many of those stories seem not to be written by disinterested parties. Imagine if One America Network “factchecked” Biden, or worse, if they “factchecked” Trump.
“We rate the claim that Joe murdered Klausutis as plausible”
For what I’d consider a rather bad take:
Since certain parties lately have been pushing for literally everything to be politicized, trying to exclude political speech from fact checking would be a fricking disaster.