Twitter labeled Trump tweets with a fact check for the first time

[Pound4abrown]

Donald Trump is literally the biggest punk I've ever seen.

You didn't spell ***** right.

 

[roguenuke]

OK. Defending his tweets or the validity of his accusation's was never may point. Twitter's decision to be the arbiter of facts puts the lie to the notion that the business deserves liability protection.

If facts are questionable, then yes, they are providing counter to that information. This isn't them countering opinions. It is them presenting people with real facts that counter posts that essentially aren't facts.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

 

[Pound4abrown]

Trump should use a different social media platform. I bet Twitter would have some regrets then.

Yeah, he should totally take his ball and go home.

 

[Pound4abrown]

We should fact check everything we are being told, twice.

 

[Pound4abrown]

And? If Trump had said this over the phone, should ATT&T censor it? Should Comcast?

Neither ATT&T or Comcast phone lines are public. So apples and like baby sharks.

 

[Pound4abrown]

I don't know. Is Twitter a platform or a publisher?

ATT&T and Comcast phone lines are not publishers either. Your analogy keeps getting worse.

 

[Pound4abrown]

Your internet communications are still Private unless a) someone illegally hacks them, or b) you release the info.

The legal principle is not completely the same. For one thing, they aren't censoring him. They are requesting readers to fact check the information being put out. He is still free to post it.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

And add to that, your internet provider can suspend and even cancel you if you break their code of conduct and terms of service.

 

[Pound4abrown]

What kinda fascist opinion is this?

The USA has a free press. Take your unAmerican **** back to Putin. Accusing a perceived "enemy" of a murder he didn't commit is a tin-pot dictator move. Celebrating it is very CCP of you.

I fully expect the WH to issue a declaration before election day that Trump has ascended to a new level of enlightenment and no longer needs to defecate.
I can't wait to see the T-shirts in Trump Nation when it happens.

 

[TheDoctorWasIn]

This should forever put to rest any notion that Twitter is a utility. Publishers are accountable for what they publish.

Let the lawsuits commence!

No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.

Laws are fun.

 

[noonereal]

Donald Trump is literally the biggest punk I've ever seen.

exactly

the guy is despicable

 

[TheDoctorWasIn]

I'm not on Twitter. I have no grounds for a suit.

But understand that, under U.S. libel law, a publisher that curates content -- like what Twitter is doing here -- accepts accountability for that content.

Copyright claims ... libel .... criminal conspiracy ...

Twitter can't possibly police the content of every user to the degree necessary to protect itself from liability.

So, in the past, Twitter and other social media platforms have argued that they are utilities like the phone company. AT&T is not reponsible for what you say on their network almost entirely because ATT&T doesn't attempt to exercise control over what you say on their network.

So where does that leave Twitter?

Again. Section 230 of the CDA. 47 U.S.C. 230.

No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.

 

[GhostlyJoe]

Neither ATT&T or Comcast phone lines are public. So apples and like baby sharks.

Huh? Comcast is an ISP. Twitter is a private company. I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.

 

[JustHanging]

Again. Section 230 of the CDA. 47 U.S.C. 230.

No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.

Thank you for taking the time to look that up and post it in the forum.

 

[GhostlyJoe]

No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.

Laws are fun.

You mean this law.

Yeah, not only does it not necessary apply to Twitter acting as a publisher -- "interactive computer service" has specific meaning under the law -- but it is also exactly a law targeted by Republicans and Trump in the past. "Good faith" is also a component of the law.

But that is the rub of it as far as social media protections in the federal code. Those protections are designed to prevent liability for ISPs, WordPress, FaceBook, etc. from being responsible for what users' post. In this case, though, Twitter is actually posting the content.

 

[GhostlyJoe]

Again. Section 230 of the CDA. 47 U.S.C. 230.

No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.

Answered and addressed. I also mentioned the law in a previous post and linked arguments surrounding it.

 

[marke]

Twitter labeled Trump tweets with a fact check for the first time

Trump had made false statements about the threat of voter fraud posed by the expansion of mail-in voting in California.

After telling 18,000+ lies and pushing innumerable conspiracy theories since the 2017 inauguration, it's high time Trump was held accountable for his media disinformation. He's every bit as bad as the Russians.

Related: Twitter has started fact-checking Trump's tweets

Twitter. The latest company to fall under the Marxist deception of the anti-American democrat socialist movement.

 

[TheDoctorWasIn]

You mean this law.

Yeah, not only does it not necessary apply to Twitter acting as a publisher -- "interactive computer service" has specific meaning under the law -- but it is also exactly a law targeted by Republicans and Trump in the past. "Good faith" is also a component of the law.

But that is the rub of it as far as social media protections in the federal code. Those protections are designed to prevent liability for ISPs, WordPress, FaceBook, etc. from being responsible for what users' post. In this case, though, Twitter is actually posting the content.

It definitely applies to twitter.

The purpose of Section 320 was to allow websites or services that distribute user-generated material to moderate content without opening themselves up to liability.

Without Section 320, this website would not exist.

 

[Rogue Valley]

OK. Defending his tweets or the validity of his accusation's was never may point. Twitter's decision to be the arbiter of facts puts the lie to the notion that the business deserves liability protection.

I don't know whatever happened to you. You used to be well reasoned and at least neutral.

 

[Jezcoe]

It definitely applies to twitter.

The purpose of Section 320 was to allow websites or services that distribute user-generated material to moderate content without opening themselves up to liability.

Without Section 320, this website would not exist.

Quick Question.

If Twitter loses 320 status, would that open them up to libel lawsuits?

For instance, would Joe Scarborough be able to sue Twitter over allowing the President to spread false murder claims against him?

And if so, would it be in Twitter's legal interest to enforce their TOS against the President?

 

[BlueTex]

Quick Question.

If Twitter loses 320 status, would that open them up to libel lawsuits?

For instance, would Joe Scarborough be able to sue Twitter over allowing the President to spread false murder claims against him?

And if so, would it be in Twitter's legal interest to enforce their TOS against the President?

Yep, they would have to ban Trump from twitter... :lol:

PS. It's section 230, not 320...

 

[Jezcoe]

Yep, they would have to ban Trump from twitter... :lol:

PS. It's section 230, not 320...

Thanks.. that what I thought.

230... 231... 320...321... what ever it takes.

 

[KLATTU]

Waiting for Twitter to fact check the Cobra Commander...

Joe Biden
✔
@JoeBiden
So much of this could have been prevented if we had a president who listened to someone other than himself.

 

[GhostlyJoe]

It definitely applies to twitter.

The purpose of Section 320 was to allow websites or services that distribute user-generated material to moderate content without opening themselves up to liability.

Without Section 320, this website would not exist.

Understood. If you're familiar with the law, you know as well as I there are arguments over interpretation and plenty of interest in modifying this particular statue. It shields these companies from the liability they would normally face under libel, copyright laws, etc.

The law as worded essentially protects all online publishers of 3rd-party content. Not likely that will stand the test of time.

In this particular instance, however, Twitter is actually providing its own content in the political arena. Seriously, if it's not a violation of the letter of the law -- questionable, if you ask me -- it clearly violates the spirit of the law.

 

[BlueTex]

Understood. If you're familiar with the law, you know as well as I there are arguments over interpretation and plenty of interest in modifying this particular statue. It shields these companies from the liability they would normally face under libel, copyright laws, etc.

The law as worded essentially protects all online publishers of 3rd-party content. Not likely that will stand the test of time.

In this particular instance, however, Twitter is actually providing its own content in the political arena. Seriously, if it's not a violation of the letter of the law -- questionable, if you ask me -- it clearly violates the spirit of the law.

As the law is written, who determines whether a party in a lawsuit receives section 230 protection?

 

[GhostlyJoe]

I don't know whatever happened to you. You used to be well reasoned and at least neutral.

I just don't have TDS. And these lockdowns are f***ed. I never signed on to the idea that we go about our daily lives thanks only to the benevolence of government, nor the idea that my neighbors can shut me down whenever they get a whiff of some existential threat.