Blog Archives

I Have Questions




Most of us have long ago said that we believe that Facebook and Twitter (and other Social Media platforms) have the “right” to ban whomever they please, because, “it’s not a First Amendment issue.” In fact, even Trump’s legal team seems to agree with this position.

But solely for the purpose of careful consideration of the ENTIRE issue, let us consider a few things that haven’t gotten much discussion, at least as far as I can find.

Now, again, let us be clear, the Platforms themselves are not the government. I believe that we all agree that given that circumstance, they are free to allow or disallow participation as they see fit. So, banning Alex Jones or Louis Farrakhan or shadow banning Devin’s Cow might be a bad business plan and result in customer blowback, but it is allowable. Whether or not they should do it is another matter.

But… let us consider some things here:

USC §47 section 230 is a law, passed by Congress which exempts Social Media and Web Sites from being held liable for the end user comments (speech).

Two leading Congress Members* (and One Cow**) have recently publically declared that if the platforms will not eliminate speech which they find objectionable they will push for the Congress to pass a law which will repeal section 230 of USC §47, thus removing the exemption for Facebook, Twitter, and other web platforms which allow users to participate in the form of comments and/or posts, and making them responsible for the potential fallout from such comments and/or posts.

Did you hear what I said? Congress shall pass a law which causes the free speech of commenter’s to be “chilled” by punishing the platforms which allow it for whatever the commenters may say or presumably do.

How is that NOT a 1st Amendment issue?


Advertisements

Was It Worth It?




Mark Zuckerberg has made it clear that he does not understand the 1st Amendment. Or what “political speech” actually is.

Now, within the context of his creation, Facebook, he is free to promote or suppress speech as he sees fit. The problem is that he doesn’t want to do it. I mean, he does want to do it, but he doesn’t want to be blamed for it. Instead, he wants the government to do it for him.

The problem is, of course, that like many in the entertainment and governmental industries, he doesn’t seem to grasp that the Government cannot do that… well… in fairness, there aren’t very many people who grasp that.

It all makes my annual question to 129 men who died this day in 1963 more poignant.


@DevinCow





Do you know why I don’t worry about Global warming or volcanoes or recycling? Because we are all going to die. Evolution is as certain as a sunrise (for the next few billion years, anyway). Nobody gets out alive and humanity will come to an end someday, regardless of how many taxes we raise or plastic water bottles we bury. NASA reminded us of this fact this week. with a 107 kiloton calling card from nature…

I am continually amazed at people who tell me that they believe in the Constitution and the rights that it guarantees are the first people in line to do the opposite when it suits them. Take @DevinCow, ahem, Congressman Devin Nunes. He once wrote a book filled with platitudes and promises about how much he loves liberty and the rights we have protected by the Constitution.

Until those rights start offending him personally. Then it’s off to the court to file a $250 Million lawsuit against Twitter…

%d bloggers like this: