Twitter To Censor Trump Tweets Ahead Of 2020 Election

[Harpy Eagle]

They do not claim to be ATT, that is just your spin, not them.

They will allow you to post either of those.

If Twitter gets treated that way, every site on the web needs to be also. The Christian forum I was a part of needs to allow full and total access to anyone that wants to post there, else they should be treated like a newspaper also.

Twitter should be treated like USMB. Pretty similar? Yet Twitter receives greater protections than USMB. Ask the Mods. Why is that? If they are truly just an internet conduit of info. then why do they block content? They should not block anything but allow the users to block content, which they may but Twitter, which leans Left is blocking conservatives. I am not on Twitter but I find that alarming if in fact they claim to be just a conduit and not like the NYT..a source for biased info.

They block content because as your link above alluded to, they can still be sued for what is on their site

Then they should not advertise or be classified as a neutral provider of content. They block what they deem is offensive. Subjective. Should be regulated as such imo. We are going in circles we need a third party to moderate.

Being a neutral provider of content does not prohibit you from blocking content that would damage your company.

Which is subjective. Hence you’re not neutral.

Then no such thing exist, nor should it exist. A private company should always do what is best for its bottom line.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Twitter should be treated like USMB. Pretty similar? Yet Twitter receives greater protections than USMB. Ask the Mods. Why is that? If they are truly just an internet conduit of info. then why do they block content? They should not block anything but allow the users to block content, which they may but Twitter, which leans Left is blocking conservatives. I am not on Twitter but I find that alarming if in fact they claim to be just a conduit and not like the NYT..a source for biased info.

They block content because as your link above alluded to, they can still be sued for what is on their site

Then they should not advertise or be classified as a neutral provider of content. They block what they deem is offensive. Subjective. Should be regulated as such imo. We are going in circles we need a third party to moderate.

Being a neutral provider of content does not prohibit you from blocking content that would damage your company.

Which is subjective. Hence you’re not neutral.

Then no such thing exist, nor should it exist. A private company should always do what is best for its bottom line.

So the NYT may write that you’re an alien and be Ok with it? There are certain rules to journalism and Twitter is closer to NYT than AT&T and should be regulated as such.

 

[jc456]

When they stop acting as a platform and more like a publisher, like exercising editorial control, maybe some of their congressional exemptions should go away.

.

The moment they do one modification to any one of the candidates tweets they will find themselves in federal court and an injunction keeping them from making any further alterations imposed. The Moment they take "editorial control" they then will lose the freedoms they have as a private provider. The FCC could shut them down totally for this as it violates their license to operate.

They are not altering anything, they are adding a warning about the content. They are well within their rights to do so

Wait...So you're saying they are actually treating the Oompa Loompa Oligarch differently than they are treating other people? Joe Blow would be banned, but for Doddering Donnie we get content warnings?

No one should as long as they follow the rules . Bias based shit is suppression

It's the opposite of that. Joe Blow violates TOS, gets banned. Public figure violates TOS does not get banned. It's making different rules for the wealthy and powerful that don't apply to you and I. That's not "suppression".

Violates what TOS? Tell me

 

[flacaltenn]

Censor liberal tweets the same way? Would that be too much to ask?

Yes, how about let free speech reign?

There is no free speech on a private server. I just ask that if one person is censored that all be censored the same way.

Read the statement from Twitter, they are not doing it to one person only

True.. But they are doing this BECAUSE of one person.

And the stupid morons are taking this power trip in the exact WRONG direction.. See my post above...

You want to know what I think happened?
Twitter was receiving a thousand complaints a day saying "You took down my Tweet because of all that bad language--how come you don't take down the President's?" So Twitter, in an attempt to be fair without taking down the POTUS's tweets, is going to put a little sticky on the worst ones, noting that yeah, they saw it and if crass language offends you, you might want to skip this one.

Twitter tries to be fair and they're STILL getting jumped all over by the right, who is not going to stop until only Sinclair runs the media in this country.

Twitter DESIGNED itself to be a vacuous troll pit.. It's like buying more chromey stuff for a junker car.. People complain because Twitter doesn't HAVE A SUCCINCT list of rules and policies on specific CONTENT.. And Twitter does these punishments quite arbitrarily...

Outside of the famous "cofefee" tweet that was probably some reference to go attempt hermaphroditic reproduction, there's a bunch of name-calling in the Prez tweets.. There's nothing there to actually censor.. Let him learn a some on the job self-control....

They CAN'T outlaw trolling. It's their thing...

 

[jc456]

How so? Wha is it you *think* you know about me? I bet you're wrong.

I know you professed ignorance on a subject you were previously pontificating on.

I wasn't talking about California's PUC. That's your rambling.

Once again, freedom of speech doesn't mean you can use the government to force people to say what you want (or otherwise accommodate your ideas against their will). It means exactly the opposite. It means you CAN'T do that. Hopefully there's enough sanity left on the Court to recognize that vital fact

For you puritan liberals everything is a legal issue. But in the case the legalities are settled...monopolies not acting in the public interst are regulated or broken up all the time. Whether that is right or wrong..it is a fact. I am used to Democrats defending the interests of the elite.
What happened to Standard Oil? AT&T?
But forget the legalities. And know that your country is run by and the debate and agenda set by, these huge corporations. THEY decide who has the power to object.
So at the very least why dont we pull their protections?

We should. We should repeal all those laws, across the board. But you're not advocating for that. You want to do it selectively, just to bully companies who aren't doing what you want. It's the worst kind of hypocrisy and it's exactly why all those perks and protections are so poisonous to begin with. They might sound like the serve some noble interest, but in point of fact they are simply tools for authoritarians to exert power over opposition.

The authoritarians are strangling free speech. An you enable it. You would rather hear no opposition. Thats to your own detriment.

Actually he’s for no free speech

 

[dblack]

I know you professed ignorance on a subject you were previously pontificating on.

I wasn't talking about California's PUC. That's your rambling.

Once again, freedom of speech doesn't mean you can use the government to force people to say what you want (or otherwise accommodate your ideas against their will). It means exactly the opposite. It means you CAN'T do that. Hopefully there's enough sanity left on the Court to recognize that vital fact

For you puritan liberals everything is a legal issue. But in the case the legalities are settled...monopolies not acting in the public interst are regulated or broken up all the time. Whether that is right or wrong..it is a fact. I am used to Democrats defending the interests of the elite.
What happened to Standard Oil? AT&T?
But forget the legalities. And know that your country is run by and the debate and agenda set by, these huge corporations. THEY decide who has the power to object.
So at the very least why dont we pull their protections?

We should. We should repeal all those laws, across the board. But you're not advocating for that. You want to do it selectively, just to bully companies who aren't doing what you want. It's the worst kind of hypocrisy and it's exactly why all those perks and protections are so poisonous to begin with. They might sound like the serve some noble interest, but in point of fact they are simply tools for authoritarians to exert power over opposition.

The authoritarians are strangling free speech. An you enable it. You would rather hear no opposition. Thats to your own detriment.

Actually he’s for no free speech

If you think "free speech" is the government forcing companies to accommodate you, then you are as deluded as the progressives trying to bully cake bakers. You're making the same arguments, and offering the same excuses.

 

[ptbw forever]

This is too much.... all I want to know.....what will be done about this?

When enough will be enough??

WHEN?


Twitter To Censor Trump Tweets Ahead Of 2020 Election

We can't have a free press defying the government! Something must be done!!!

"The free press" no longer exists.

 

[jc456]

I wasn't talking about California's PUC. That's your rambling.

Once again, freedom of speech doesn't mean you can use the government to force people to say what you want (or otherwise accommodate your ideas against their will). It means exactly the opposite. It means you CAN'T do that. Hopefully there's enough sanity left on the Court to recognize that vital fact

For you puritan liberals everything is a legal issue. But in the case the legalities are settled...monopolies not acting in the public interst are regulated or broken up all the time. Whether that is right or wrong..it is a fact. I am used to Democrats defending the interests of the elite.
What happened to Standard Oil? AT&T?
But forget the legalities. And know that your country is run by and the debate and agenda set by, these huge corporations. THEY decide who has the power to object.
So at the very least why dont we pull their protections?

We should. We should repeal all those laws, across the board. But you're not advocating for that. You want to do it selectively, just to bully companies who aren't doing what you want. It's the worst kind of hypocrisy and it's exactly why all those perks and protections are so poisonous to begin with. They might sound like the serve some noble interest, but in point of fact they are simply tools for authoritarians to exert power over opposition.

The authoritarians are strangling free speech. An you enable it. You would rather hear no opposition. Thats to your own detriment.

Actually he’s for no free speech

If you think "free speech" is the government forcing companies to accommodate you, then you are as deluded as the progressives trying to bully cake bakers. You're making the same arguments, and offering the same excuses.

Not at all. Fk those companies! I don’t need them. It’s you that licks their balls! I’m proud of you

 

[dblack]

For you puritan liberals everything is a legal issue. But in the case the legalities are settled...monopolies not acting in the public interst are regulated or broken up all the time. Whether that is right or wrong..it is a fact. I am used to Democrats defending the interests of the elite.
What happened to Standard Oil? AT&T?
But forget the legalities. And know that your country is run by and the debate and agenda set by, these huge corporations. THEY decide who has the power to object.
So at the very least why dont we pull their protections?

We should. We should repeal all those laws, across the board. But you're not advocating for that. You want to do it selectively, just to bully companies who aren't doing what you want. It's the worst kind of hypocrisy and it's exactly why all those perks and protections are so poisonous to begin with. They might sound like the serve some noble interest, but in point of fact they are simply tools for authoritarians to exert power over opposition.

The authoritarians are strangling free speech. An you enable it. You would rather hear no opposition. Thats to your own detriment.

Actually he’s for no free speech

If you think "free speech" is the government forcing companies to accommodate you, then you are as deluded as the progressives trying to bully cake bakers. You're making the same arguments, and offering the same excuses.

Not at all. Fk those companies! I don’t need them. It’s you that licks their balls! I’m proud of you

Same arguments. Same excuses. You're essentially a progressive statist.

 

[jc456]

We should. We should repeal all those laws, across the board. But you're not advocating for that. You want to do it selectively, just to bully companies who aren't doing what you want. It's the worst kind of hypocrisy and it's exactly why all those perks and protections are so poisonous to begin with. They might sound like the serve some noble interest, but in point of fact they are simply tools for authoritarians to exert power over opposition.

The authoritarians are strangling free speech. An you enable it. You would rather hear no opposition. Thats to your own detriment.

Actually he’s for no free speech

If you think "free speech" is the government forcing companies to accommodate you, then you are as deluded as the progressives trying to bully cake bakers. You're making the same arguments, and offering the same excuses.

Not at all. Fk those companies! I don’t need them. It’s you that licks their balls! I’m proud of you

Same arguments. Same excuses. You're essentially a progressive statist.

Gaslighting

 

[dblack]

So, what other industries to the Trumpsters want to declare "public utilities"?

 

[jc456]

So, what other industries to the Trumpsters want to declare "public utilities"?

Huh, English please

 

[dblack]

So, what other industries to the Trumpsters want to declare "public utilities"?

Huh, English please

Which companies do you want to fuck over next?

 

[jc456]

So, what other industries to the Trumpsters want to declare "public utilities"?

Huh, English please

Which companies do you want to fuck over next?

There aren’t any! AOC did that to Amazon! Learn something for a change stupid fk

 

[dblack]

So, what other industries to the Trumpsters want to declare "public utilities"?

Huh, English please

Which companies do you want to fuck over next?

There aren’t any! AOC did that to Amazon! Learn something for a change stupid fk

English please.

 

[beagle9]

This is too much.... all I want to know.....what will be done about this?

When enough will be enough??

WHEN?


Twitter To Censor Trump Tweets Ahead Of 2020 Election

What do YOU think should be done about a private business doing something?

Is it totally free to do what it wants if it has to access it's audience via the public utilities ?? Aren't those utilities regulated ??? Yes, private business is given alot of freedom's within reason, but if it begins to abuse those freedom's, then that changes everything.

 

[jc456]

So, what other industries to the Trumpsters want to declare "public utilities"?

Huh, English please

Which companies do you want to fuck over next?

There aren’t any! AOC did that to Amazon! Learn something for a change stupid fk

English please.

It was, you should learn it perhaps!

 

[dblack]

This is too much.... all I want to know.....what will be done about this?

When enough will be enough??

WHEN?


Twitter To Censor Trump Tweets Ahead Of 2020 Election

What do YOU think should be done about a private business doing something?

Is it totally free to do what it wants if it has to access it's audience via the public utilities ?? Aren't those utilities regulated ??? Yes, private business is given alot of freedom's within reason, but if it begins to abuse those freedom's, then that changes everything.

Everyone, every business, every person, derives benefit from public utilities. That's what public means. By your reasoning, everyone of us must give up our rights because of that. Your reasoning sucks.

 

[beagle9]

So, what other industries to the Trumpsters want to declare "public utilities"?

Huh, English please

Which companies do you want to fuck over next?

So you are for companies having total freedom as long as it suits your political agenda or angle, but if it is then conservative companies all hell breaks loose if it goes off the plantation eh ???

 

[beagle9]

This is too much.... all I want to know.....what will be done about this?

When enough will be enough??

WHEN?


Twitter To Censor Trump Tweets Ahead Of 2020 Election

What do YOU think should be done about a private business doing something?

Is it totally free to do what it wants if it has to access it's audience via the public utilities ?? Aren't those utilities regulated ??? Yes, private business is given alot of freedom's within reason, but if it begins to abuse those freedom's, then that changes everything.

Everyone, every business, every person, derives benefit from public utilities. That's what public means. By your reasoning, everyone of us must give up our rights because of that. Your reasoning sucks.

Your rational sucks sour grapes more. No one wants to hinder so called private business unless private business attacks first. Then we have a problem.