💥⚖️💥 Justice Clarence Thomas Asks the Supreme Court to Reevaluate Big Tech’s Immunity Under Section 230 💥⚖️💥
(www.thegatewaypundit.com)
LET'S GOOoOo
Comments (62)
sorted by:
Publisher or platform. You can't be both. That would go a long way towards solving this problem.
Spot on.
Yes, but until these monopolies are shattered there will be no solution or freedom. The DS controls everything now. Not just tech and media, but banks and the massive holding companies that own the other mega-corporations that run everything else. Oh, yeah, and the politicians.
The one good thing I suppose that could come of this is that the smaller platforms could have their protections fortified. But even that matters little while the beast controls most of the information, and thus the population.
45 years ago the Government wouldn't even allow Bell South a monopoly on phone lines. Now look at the corruption and collusion. Way out of control.
Schrodinger’s Liability
All it takes is for people to nut up and sue (if they have a valid case).
@Jack's chief legal officer went on Joe Rogan and expressly said that they're not a platform. He kept pushing her... ~"Aren't you really a publisher? Aren't these posts things that Twitter is saying?" And she was like "Yes, absolutely. We're not a neutral publisher. We try to do out best curating content, but we definitely aren't perfect at what we publish." Naturally, it all went through Rogan's ears without computing.
Facebook and Twitter HATE Section 230, and they're clear about it. They sent that "whistleblower" to go testify to congress. They want it repealed, because it EXPOSES them to liability... it doesn't actually protect them.
However, there's a huge turf campaign say the opposite... and that's convinced a few people that repealing 230 - which is literally what FB is openly campaigning for - would somehow hurt them.
A journalist who was banned on Twitter because of his covid reporting, is suing them. Alex Berenson is the reporter.
Further reexamination and clarification would help sue. Or, on the other hand, prove that what they're doing is wrong so it can die slowly.
Very much so.
Unfortunately, I don’t think this will go anywhere, there is too much lobbying power on the Big Tech camp ($$) and far too many politicians on the take.
He will be when all this is over.
Absolutely! I agree Mary.
Pray for his safety...(((they))) already murdered one SC Justice. 🙏
Me, too Mary...he has integrity.
May GOD bless Justice Thomas.
Operation Dark Winter!
In light of this news, it makes total sense why Truth Social has a waiting list.
Trump knows what is coming, so they absolutely must vet everyone who is added to make sure bots don't flood the site with child porn, snuff films, and other vile acts in order to get Truth to go down with all the other social media giants and Trump being responsible after 230 implodes.
Exactly! There has to be a reason for the delay.
They had my information in plenty of time to vet me.
This is way more than publisher or platform.
Big tech is attempting to usurp legislative power over the people and their governments. But, there will be no legislation and no representation. They will simply DICTATE their laws and use their power to exclude you from life (death while you yet live), if you don't comply. It's a coup by big tech against government and the people.
Even governments are being targeted now.
Very soon, as we're seeing with Russia, even governments and entire countries will be social credited out of existence.
Congress is watching it happen.
Great point.
I believe the resident's administration even said the Ukrainian conflict would be measured on social reputation, or something along those lines. That falls directly in line with what you are referencing.
MSM and Big Tech MUST FALL. It's the only way to win for good and ensure every normie knows it.
It has been this way for a long time - politicians need funding, and with immense funding, you’re able to sway public opinion.
However, we do have power — not to use Big Tech information platforms. We are seeing rising alternatives.
The damage by big tech has already been done. We finally get a reasonable alternative infrastructure built and now all of the sudden 230 becomes an issue. I’m all for punishment. But I also hope this doesn’t impede on alt techs ability to fuck big tech by driving them into irrelevance.
This is my concern. This whole thing feels... timed too well. I'm a Thomas fan but... this is suspect.
My guess is this issue will not solve itself, and will continue for a long, long time.
The turning point will be a new-form platform or service that is beyond the control of centralized regimes. I have no idea how it would look like, but you will see how fast 230 is forgotten while a new war is waged on this ‘new’ thing.
(Article is March 8,2022 Q post #841 is Mar 04, 2018 11:19:05...4days from a 4 year Delta coincidence ??) Mar 04, 2018 11:17:41 AM EST Anonymous
Has Q ever mentioned internet bill of rights?
Boom u/7Nick9 👍🏻
I sure hope this is connected so these idiots will be pushed out into the light for everyone see & not just us !
My main concern after reading the ATT link is the following. They are making the case that congress needs to create legislation to establish an Internet Bill of Rights. My concern is that our congress sucks and would never create a good law on this.
🤔
#antitrust and #InternetBillOfRights have been screamed by me for years. Glad it is finally being recognized!
To use a Psaki-ism, glad to see we've circled back to this. Thought it got memory holed.
This will lead to more censorship. Without immunity, they will censor with reckless abandon.
With immunity, they already censor with reckless abandon.
How do you figure without immunity they will censor even more?
Because then it will become legal for them to curate content out, based on State, County, and Municipal laws, ordinances, rules, mandates, etc. It's a very slippery slope. It may be a publicly traded company, but it's still considered a private company regarding U.S. Constitutional protections. It's not the company's fault that nefarious actors use it for nefarious things. Yes, it could be argued that Zuckerberg is nefarious himself, and it would be true, but good luck proving it in a court of law that will hear that argument. There is no verifiable proof as of yet, only conjecture and supposition. And he'd destroy that argument in court.
You may not like it, but the various social media companies have this protection in place because it violate their rights under the law. And it's a very slippery slope from what we have now, however frustrating to is, to what China is doing, or Russia, or any other truly despotic country. We think our leaders are despots, but we don't know the true meaning of the word here in America.
You think the censorship is bad now? Remove their S230 protections and then watch how fast they drop the banhammer on everything. All in the name of "safety" and "security" for a "decent society."
It’s already legal for them to do that under section 203.
Well if you ban everything, there's no social left .
Perfect
I'm telling you. Once they can be sued for the content posted by their users, there will not be anything allowed.
Sorry friend, what we have in place now with section 203 is broke.
It needs to be trashed and the legislature needs to go back to the drawing board, and this time without loopholes.
I am not saying it isn't broken. I'm saying watch what you wish for. When social media companies no longer have immunity from the content posted on their site, they will have an excuse to ban everything they want. If you cannot see that, I cannot help you.
They already have that excuse. Sorry I’m just not following.
No problem though, I’ll move on.
If they had that excuse now, there wouldn't be anything on twitter. Riddle me this, how is Disclose.tv still on there? After removal of Section 230, they won't be. That' s just one example. Censorship is bad now, but we ain't seen nothing yet.
They could drop disclose TV right now if they wanted with no repercussions.
Already they censor the things conservatives want to share. The censorship is one sided. That is the problem.
That's the point. They will censor until their own platforms are totally unappealing to normies.
Now if only there were a free speech platform the normies could migrate to...
Don’t understand why this down voted so heavily. I like to see the devils advocate position. It is oddly convenient that they haven’t had serious section 230 talks until truth social dropped. I definitely don’t know how to feel about this one after seeing the law only used to fuck anyone right leaning repeatedly.
Wow, initiated by the court.
Thank you Judge Thomas!!! You are a God-sent.
Google was initially developed by DARPA, and Microsoft was basically given to or stolen by Bill Gates. There is an agenda to it. Julian Assange wrote about it here: https://wikileaks.org/google-is-not-what-it-seems/
Let's GOOOOOOOO
Legal gamesmanship will be played under any form of law. Need to make them irrelevant, that is, alternative media. Truth Social.
The effort here needs to be about what this actually means in practical terms..... and knowing that then asking why now?
It’s an odd time to be what it appears.....
WWG1WGA
Good job, Justice Thomas. It is about time someone questioned this.
But why just now? Big Tech has been into the fuckery for a long time now.
The Supremes themselves can bring up a case for re-evaluation???