SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Leaked draft details Trump's likely attack on technology giants:
The Trump Administration is putting the final touches on a sweeping executive order designed to punish online platforms for perceived anti-conservative bias. Legal scholar Kate Klonick obtained a draft of the document and posted it online late Wednesday night.
[...] The document claims that online platforms have been "flagging content as inappropriate even though it does not violate any stated terms of service, making unannounced and unexplained changes to policies that have the effect of disfavoring certain viewpoints, and deleting content and entire accounts with no warning, no rationale, and no recourse."
The order then lays out several specific policy initiatives that will purportedly promote "free and open debate on the Internet."
First up is Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.
[...] Trump's draft executive order would ask the Federal Communications Commission to clarify Section 230—specifically a provision shielding companies from liability when they remove objectionable content.
[...] Next, the executive order directs federal agencies to review their ad spending to ensure that no ad dollars go to online platforms that "violate free speech principles."
Another provision asks the Federal Trade Commission to examine whether online platforms are restricting speech "in ways that do not align with those entities' public representations about those practices"—in other words, whether the companies' actual content moderation practices are consistent with their terms of service. The executive order suggests that an inconsistency between policy and practice could constitute an "unfair and deceptive practice" under consumer protection laws.
Trump would also ask the FTC to consider whether large online platforms like Facebook and Twitter have become so big that they've effectively become "the modern public square"—and hence governed by the First Amendment.
[...] Finally, the order directs US Attorney General William Barr to organize a working group of state attorneys general to consider whether online platforms' policies violated state consumer protection laws.
[Ed Note - The following links have been added]
Follow Up Article: Trump is desperate to punish Big Tech but has no good way to do it
The Executive Order: Executive Order on Preventing Online Censorship
(Score: 5, Insightful) by meustrus on Friday May 29 2020, @05:01PM (7 children)
You'd have a point if we were talking about all the things said about his orange complexion, such as saying his mom was an orangutan.
I'm not a Trump supporter, but I don't like those comments either. That's also not what we're talking about.
We're talking about any and all discussion of his plans that isn't lavish praise. He will not accept even reasonable criticism from his allies. Anyone who openly attacks a political position which he supports becomes an enemy of the state.
That's what's happening here. Twitter dared to take issue with his politicization of mail-in voting. Therefore Twitter must be enthralled to the DNC and George Soros and all those evil Democrats that hate America</sarcasm>.
As a management style, it's incredibly stupid and ineffective. He kicks out everyone that isn't a yes man in his presence. As a result, his plans typically have no basis in reality, and are only after the fact massaged into something that might actually achieve his goals. I can't decide whether this is good, because it means the plans I don't like are less effective, or bad because it means nothing he does is effective and creates a power vacuum. At least it's good at insulating him from the worse excesses of the Republican establishment.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 2, Insightful) by DeathMonkey on Friday May 29 2020, @05:31PM (6 children)
And that is the crux of the issue.
The Federal Government is retaliating agains Twitter because they criticized Trump.
That's so fucking un-American it's ridiculous. But, here we are...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 29 2020, @08:16PM (5 children)
Hypocrisy, man, does not become anyone. Especially when you compound it with inane arguments as to how you are entitled to do whatever, and everyone else is not.
(Score: 2, Troll) by meustrus on Friday May 29 2020, @10:19PM (4 children)
I don't remember Obama retaliating like this against any private enterprise for disagreeing with his politics. Neither do I remember Bush or Clinton doing such things. Perhaps you can enlighten us when was the last time anybody besides Trump felt "entitled" to threaten communications or news platforms for being critical of the government.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 29 2020, @11:44PM (1 child)
Drop the inanity already. When you use human tools or corporate tools to do your dirty work, it can protect your arse from the law, but it cannot fool anyone.
(Score: 2) by meustrus on Monday June 01 2020, @04:13PM
I'm having trouble parsing this. Can you explain what you mean?
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 1) by hemocyanin on Saturday May 30 2020, @02:27AM (1 child)
All of the far left publications that did and would have criticized Obama, have been crippled by bigTech. There is no way that the legacy media will ever say anything bad about Obama and they've even rehabbed GWB. It's tiresome for those of us who paid attention but yeah, going forward there won't be much to remember because of the way the left is being deplatformed in favor of the CNN/MSNBC/etc. legacy media.
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2017/10/20/goog-o20.html [wsws.org]
As for Obama retaliating, just off the top of my head, do these names ring a bell? Binney Assange Manning Kiriakou
https://www.longislandpress.com/2017/01/14/obamas-legacy-historic-war-on-whistleblowers/ [longislandpress.com]
(Score: 2) by meustrus on Monday June 01 2020, @04:20PM
This isn't about the legacy media; I don't pay any attention to CNN/MSNBC, or Fox, or HuffPo, or any of the rest of what I'd call corporate news. Granted, that makes it hard to hear about some things. But if none of SoylentNews, NPR, or the many people I know who talk news saw fit to repeat it, it's probably not worth repeating.
As for Obama...well I wasn't thinking of retaliation against individuals, only corporations. So technically, you haven't given with a counterargument. But practically, the secret retaliation against individuals is much more damaging. You got me there.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?