SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the what-were-you-saying-about-Free-Speech? dept.
It would give these bureaucratic government agencies unprecedented control over how Internet platforms moderate speech by allowing them to revoke the essential protections Congress laid out in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA). CDA 230 is the basic law that makes it possible for online platforms to let users post our own content, and to make basic decisions about what types of content they as private entities want to host. Every meme, every social media post, every blog and user-created video on the Internet has been made possible by this crucial free speech protection.
In practice, this executive order would mean that whichever political party is in power could dictate what speech is allowed on the Internet. If the government doesn't like the way a private company is moderating content, they can shut their entire website down.
From https://www.salon.com/2019/08/12/leaked-draft-of-trump-executive-order-deemed-unconstitutional_partner/ we get the following:
According to CNN, which obtained a copy of the draft, the new rule "calls for the FCC to develop new regulations clarifying how and when the law protects social media websites when they decide to remove or suppress content on their platforms. Although still in its early stages and subject to change, the Trump administration's draft order also calls for the Federal Trade Commission to take those new policies into account when it investigates or files lawsuits against misbehaving companies."
While Politico was the first to report how the draft was being circulated by the White House, CNN notes that if put into effect, "the order would reflect a significant escalation by President Trump in his frequent attacks against social media companies over an alleged but unproven systemic bias against conservatives by technology platforms. And it could lead to a significant reinterpretation of a law that, its authors have insisted, was meant to give tech companies broad freedom to handle content as they see fit."
"[...] It's hard to put into words how mind bogglingly absurd this executive order is," said Evan Greer, deputy director of Fight for the Future, in a tweet. "In the name of defending free speech it would allow mass government censorship of online content. In practice, it means whichever party is in power can decide what speech is allowed on the internet."
This authoritarian legislation is being pushed by claiming it will do the opposite of censorship by giving the federal government even more broad power. Reminds me of the following quote, "I like taking guns away early," Trump said. "Take the guns first, go through due process second."
See also:
- https://www.rawstory.com/2019/08/leaked-draft-of-trump-executive-order-to-censor-the-internet-denounced-as-dangerous-unconstitutional-edict/
- https://thenextweb.com/socialmedia/2019/08/13/the-trump-administration-drafted-an-executive-order-to-censor-the-internet/
- http://dctribune.org/trumps-executive-order-to-censor-the-internet-leaked-could-allow-mass-government-censorship/
- https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20669477
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 14 2019, @04:57PM (10 children)
Lol, never thought jmorris would advocate for government censorship. Oh wait, it totally makes sense since "his team" is in charge.
For all you jerks who accuse liberals of hypocrisy I say "HA!"
Gaslight!
Obstruct!
Project!
Cry me a river Mr. Capitalist, suddenly you don't like free market forces when they do things YOU don't like? Well gee, maybe you shouldn't have cheered on the removal of regulations that might have protected you. Maybe you shouldn't be a sniveling hypocrite that cries wolf when the sheep is around while rolling belly up the minute a real wolf shows up.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by jmorris on Wednesday August 14 2019, @05:07PM (7 children)
Back when Twitter held itself up as the "Free Speech wing of the Free Speech movement", when YouTube was a wild west of everybody posting the most outrageous crap possible to get clicks, I was all in favor of leaving the Internet to regulate itself. All that changed and I changed with it. The risk of government censorship being worse than what the clearly visible trend lines point to is smaller than the current path.
When the facts on the ground changes I change, what do you do?
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday August 14 2019, @05:34PM
Censorship is evil. Twitter and Youtube are not the internet. Nobody has any right to regulate content. Aim your guns at the ISPs that practice real censorship.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 14 2019, @06:46PM
Belly up, maybe you're a fish?
"He's dead Jim!"
Seriously, what the actual fuck. New T-Shirt will sell like nazi-cakes, "Tread on them harder baby!"
At least the liberals around here have maintained "censorship sucks" even when it targets conservatives. The worst you get from us has been "awww private company kicking you out? awwww, maybe you should have supported regulation to prevent that like Net Neutrality, Fairness Doctrine, and for you anti-regulation folks REPEAL CITIZENS UNITED!"
Woops, now we see the fascist inherent in the system! Go go Jmo-fascist-electro-fist!
(Score: 2) by shortscreen on Wednesday August 14 2019, @07:26PM (4 children)
Parent post should modded up, as it just revealed the profound truth that regulation can be bad, while regulation can also be good.
Although I'm not too sure about this particular regulation. Let's say we bring back net neutrality instead?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by jmorris on Wednesday August 14 2019, @08:05PM (3 children)
Ignoring the AC tard above and replying to an actual person. Explain how Network Neutrality would help the deplatforming of what is going to wind up being half the country? This problem isn't even contained to the Internet anymore. How would Network Neutrality apply to Paypal? CitiBank? Visa? For that matter, explain how it would apply to YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, Patreon, Instagram, Cloudflare, etc. Stop beating your favorite hobby horse and try to address the actual problem.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 14 2019, @09:22PM
lol
"Who cares about ethics or morality, those people are being MEAN to me and the strong man says he'll make them stop!"
Freedom of association, build your own toys if people refuse to share theirs with you.
But nope, you go full fascist supporter like a good little sheep. I am so glad I never followed through on leaving this site, it was worth wading through your piles of shit just to see this beautifully hypocritical day.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Wednesday August 14 2019, @09:55PM
Personally, I feel the original problem was when they changed the regulations to allow commercial activity on the internet. Just revert all regulations to prior to that point.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 15 2019, @06:37PM
Well, if you think that corporate censorship and control of the Internet is such a huge threat, you have to be in favor of net neutrality in order to be consistent. It's not irrelevant at all.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by ikanreed on Wednesday August 14 2019, @06:02PM (1 child)
Fascists literally never cared about free speech. Not one fucker "concerned" about being "censored" by "the mob" ever had any goal besides suppressing criticism and institutionalizing their beliefs as inherently right and valid.
Not a single one of them was engaging in good faith.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Friday August 16 2019, @11:58PM
Damn straight, and THAT is what pisses me the hell off so hard about people like them. They are virtue-signalling, in the worst possible way, pretending to give one lonely constipated rabbit pellet of a shit about rights and freedoms, but they only mean for themselves. And worse, they think the rest of us are too stupid to figure this out. That kind of contempt makes my bile rise.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...