Skip to comments.
'Tantamount to monopoly': Trump signs executive order to curb 'unchecked power' of social media giants
Washington Examiner ^
| May 28, 2020
| Spencer Neale
Posted on 05/28/2020 3:31:05 PM PDT by kevcol
"What they're doing is tantamount to monopoly, you can say it's tantamount to taking over the airwaves," Trump said. "Can't let it happen. Otherwise, we're not going to have a Democracy, we're not going to have anything to do with a republic."
Trump announced that he is directing his administration to "develop policies and procedures to ensure taxpayer dollars are not going in any social media company that repress free speech."
Trump said he would delete Twitter if there was a "fair press" in the United States but that he refuses to do so because of the wide reach the platform gives him.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: eo; socialmedia; trump; twitter
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-27 next last
Cavuto interview.
1
posted on
05/28/2020 3:31:05 PM PDT
by
kevcol
To: kevcol
President Trump just gave us “business in a box”.
If someone designs a social media platform.. he will go.
2
posted on
05/28/2020 3:32:51 PM PDT
by
Celerity
To: kevcol
Whatever platform Trump decided to use would become instantly famous and widely used. Perhaps he could use FreeRepublic.
3
posted on
05/28/2020 3:33:28 PM PDT
by
aimhigh
(THIS is His commandment . . . . 1 John 3:23)
To: kevcol
Yeah, what he said! Trump
4
posted on
05/28/2020 3:37:13 PM PDT
by
DoughtyOne
(Some of the folks around these parts have been sniffing super flu.)
To: aimhigh
5
posted on
05/28/2020 3:37:54 PM PDT
by
DoughtyOne
(Some of the folks around these parts have been sniffing super flu.)
To: aimhigh
Gonna need a bigger boat...
LOL, would bring a lot of traffic.
6
posted on
05/28/2020 3:38:47 PM PDT
by
DoughtyOne
(Some of the folks around these parts have been sniffing super flu.)
To: kevcol
Twitter will become a case study in business school
I have noticed one thing about President Trump. He gives people a warning before he acts. Twitter executives should not be surprised over today’s Executive Order.
Smart people choose which battles to fight and which ones to walk away. Someone in their organization thought they were more powerful the the President of the United States. They have more ego then they have brains.
Today’s Executive Order is not one that was just written yesterday. It has been in the work for months (if not years) so you can be sure all the legal areas have been covered.
Is it wrong of me to get a bit of satisfaction to see the value of their stock go down, even for a short time?
7
posted on
05/28/2020 3:41:06 PM PDT
by
CIB-173RDABN
(I am not an expert in anything, and my opinion is just that, an opinion. I may be wrong.)
To: aimhigh
Whatever platform Trump decided to use would become instantly famous and widely used. Perhaps he could use FreeRepublic.
Would he get zotted, if necessary?
8
posted on
05/28/2020 3:45:09 PM PDT
by
Dr. Sivana
(There is no salvation in politics)
To: aimhigh
Perhaps he could use FreeRepublic.
Can we tease him for being a newbie?
9
posted on
05/28/2020 3:46:21 PM PDT
by
Dr. Sivana
(There is no salvation in politics)
To: Dr. Sivana
Can we tease him for being a newbie? And then have an uptight mod block him from posting for an indeterminate amount to time for bad language and name-calling?
10
posted on
05/28/2020 3:53:08 PM PDT
by
wildcard_redneck
("Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither.")
To: kevcol
I’ve always thought section 230 was always
On shaky legal ground. They essentially bar speech between people. Here they violate the First Amendment in the most basic terms.
11
posted on
05/28/2020 4:02:12 PM PDT
by
Crucial
To: kevcol
we’re not going to have anything to do with a republic.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
We haven’t had a Republic since Usurpation Day when both parties abrogated the Constitution.
Obama is not a natural born citizen.
12
posted on
05/28/2020 4:17:18 PM PDT
by
Lurkinanloomin
(Natural Born Citizens Are Born Here of Citizen Parents_Know Islam, No Peace-No Islam, Know Peace)
To: wildcard_redneck
Oh puleeze.
First of all FR is not a social media platform with billions of users. It's a conservative web site. You need to go the front page and read what FR is about before you even start posting here.
Second, FR does NOT gather or sell information about anybody to anyone.
Third, Google, Facebook YouTube etc gather information about everything and anything you do and sell that data to anyone anywhere. Google alone is making close to $10 Billion in net profits every single quarter, all of it from selling data about you.
FR on the other hand doesn't even take advertisements. It's entirely funded by contributions from members
Huge difference.
To: Crucial
Here they violate the First Amendment in the most basic terms.1st Amendment only says that the government may not restrict free speech.
It says nothing about a private party restricting free speech because that's none of the government's business.
14
posted on
05/28/2020 4:36:13 PM PDT
by
Ol' Dan Tucker
(For 'tis the sport to have the engineer hoist with his own petard., -- Hamlet, Act 3, Scene 4)
To: Dr. Sivana
Nope.
Because outside of the paid trolls and left wing activists who lurk here, almost all Freepers strongly back President Trump.
To: SmokingJoe
Lighten up, I was posting in jest.
16
posted on
05/28/2020 4:38:35 PM PDT
by
wildcard_redneck
("Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither.")
To: Ol' Dan Tucker
While the First Amendment generally does not apply to private companies, the Supreme Court has held it does not disable the government from taking steps to ensure that private interests not restrict . . . the free flow of information and ideas.
That would apply directly to Twitter Facebook Google YouTube.
To: SmokingJoe
While the First Amendment generally does not apply to private companies, the Supreme Court has held it does not disable the government from taking steps to ensure that private interests not restrict . . . the free flow of information and ideas.
That would apply directly to Twitter Facebook Google YouTube.Thanks for the info.
Yep. It would be the same thing as if Verizon was listening into our conversations, then cut off our service because it didn't like what we were discussing on the phone.
18
posted on
05/28/2020 4:58:42 PM PDT
by
Ol' Dan Tucker
(For 'tis the sport to have the engineer hoist with his own petard., -- Hamlet, Act 3, Scene 4)
To: aimhigh
He’s probably read this thread already. I do know he has people here.
To: SmokingJoe
While the First Amendment generally does not apply to private companies, the Supreme Court has held it does not disable the government from taking steps to ensure that private interests not restrict . . . the free flow of information and ideas.
That would apply directly to Twitter Facebook Google YouTube.
You are absolutely correct. Consider this case, where an individual’s freedom of expression is censored by a corporation, and the corporation is arguing that this censorship is it’s own freedom of expression. I think the Bill of Rights would side with the individual on this one.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-27 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson