The fines are not directed at the posters, but the platform. The guy's claims in the X post are misleading:
"If YOU post something on social media anywhere online that the state of California deems hateful, there's a penalty..."
That's misleading as it seems to imply the poster, the individual, would be fined. That's not in the bill. It's if the platform itself "aids and abets" in posts like that via their algorithms.
It's still bullshit and unconstitutional likely, but based on this, California would be fining platforms, not individuals. Just thought that context was still important.
But don't you think if the social media platform gets hit with big fines, they will either shut down accounts that are making what California deems "hateful" speech?
The fines are not directed at the posters, but the platform. The guy's claims in the X post are misleading:
"If YOU post something on social media anywhere online that the state of California deems hateful, there's a penalty..."
That's misleading as it seems to imply the poster, the individual, would be fined. That's not in the bill. It's if the platform itself "aids and abets" in posts like that via their algorithms.
It's still bullshit and unconstitutional likely, but based on this, California would be fining platforms, not individuals. Just thought that context was still important.
But don't you think if the social media platform gets hit with big fines, they will either shut down accounts that are making what California deems "hateful" speech?
Of course I do. I didn't say this was a good thing. Just that the claim or insinuation that individuals would be fined wasn't true.