Re: Trumpetsters Trumpet Drumpfs Lumps
The difference is that right wing speech tends toward hatful ranting about race and religion. This is generally not tolerated on any platform (outside the xChan forums) so it gets removed. Is this bias against the right or the fact that the right spouts more intolerant speech? A few cases where content has been moderated vs the vast quantity of posts that are not doesn't really point to censorship of the left. Don't spout bigoted bullshit and you won't get your posts removed. It's not difficult, and social media has no requirement to allow hate speech under any form of amendment.
Social media straddles the line and has legal protection because without some form of protection they would be sued into oblivion every time someone posted an item that upset someone else. Enough people try it now, imagine what it would be like without Section 230?
Trump's EO is just playing to the fanbase. The FCC has no authority to do anything to a website, the FTC has the authority to act against 'unfair and deceptive acts' but, as this is just cry-baby talk, nothing will be done here either. The AG could become annoying with anti-trust investigations etc. but that is already happening to a certain extent and the Section 230 bit of the order is pretty much word spaghetti. Twitter is liable for what it posts but not the posts of others - in this case it posted a fact check on Trump's inaccurate rant about postal voting... I can't see how that could possibly be affected by 230 and removal of posts that violate Twitter's T&C's is perfectly within their rights with or without 230. The only meaningful bit of the EO is the part about not spending government money on Ad's - good luck with that in an election year!!
Biting the hand that feeds IT
