Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Whitehouse Congress Petition Protect Free Speech in the Digital Public Square
Whitehouse.gov ^ | 8/28/2018 | W.C.

Posted on 08/28/2018 2:06:58 PM PDT by MarchonDC09122009

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/protect-free-speech-digital-public-square-0

WE THE PEOPLE ASK THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO CALL ON CONGRESS TO ACT ON AN ISSUE: Protect Free Speech in the Digital Public Square

Created by W.C. on August 28, 2018

4,984 SIGNED 100,000 GOAL

The internet is the modern public square. It is where political campaigns are fought and won, where journalism is created and distributed, and where grassroots movements are born. Yet, the free and open internet has become a controlled, censored space, monopolized by a few unaccountable corporations.

By banning users from their platforms, those corporations can effectively remove politically unwelcome Americans from the public square. That is repugnant to our shared values of free speech and freedom of the press.

The President should request that Congress pass legislation prohibiting social media platforms from banning users for First Amendment-protected speech. The power to block lawful content should be in the hands of individual users – not Mark Zuckerberg or Jack Dorsey.

CIVIL RIGHTS & EQUALITYTECHNOLOGY & INNOVATION Facebook Email Twitter

THE WHITE HOUSE MAY SEND ME EMAILS ABOUT THIS AND OTHER ISSUES. BY SIGNING THIS PETITION YOU AGREE TO THE TERMS OF PARTICIPATION AND PRIVACY POLICY. How Petitions Work Create a Petition Call on the White House to take action on the issue that matters to you.

Gather Signatures Share your petition with others, build a community for the change you want to make.

100,000 Signatures in 30 Days Get an official update from the White House within 60 days.


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: 1a; censorship; firstamendment; internetsocialism; petition; socialism; trump
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-94 next last
To: Travis McGee

61 posted on 08/29/2018 4:33:32 PM PDT by Lazamataz (On future maps, I suggest we remove the word "California" and substitute "Open-Air Asylum".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

But it would be better to simply support a competitor as Plan A. Antitrust would be Plan B, if they are destroying competition. Not otherwise.


62 posted on 08/29/2018 4:34:24 PM PDT by Eleutheria5 (“If you are not prepared to use force to defend civilization, then be prepared to accept barbarism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: MortMan

23,960 SIGNED


63 posted on 08/29/2018 4:34:44 PM PDT by Lazamataz (On future maps, I suggest we remove the word "California" and substitute "Open-Air Asylum".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: bert

“This petition would destroy Free Republic”

Quite.

Facebook, Twitter, etc are NOT unstoppable juggernauts. I’ve seen enough come & go over the years (since I could follow every posting on Usenet daily). Don’t overestimate their user base. Don’t overestimate their influence.

And don’t overestimate unintended consequences. Remember, FR banned InfoWars etc for YEARS - do we really want to impose “public speech on private presses” rules? no. Don’t. Go. There. You’ll regret it.

“What, you’re one of those ‘get your own press’ types?” Yes indeed. Get on Gab.ai, folks. Register your own website. Use any of the many services out there. Get off Facebook (I have, cold turkey). Get off Twitter (I’ll dump that soon). Liberate yourself from the BS managing those sites. They win because the Right feels beholden to using them. Get off en mass, deny them users, take your speech where it’s wanted.

The ONLY suggestion in support of this petition: push “common carrier” rules, to wit - if a site is going to moderate content, then absolutely hold their feet to the fire for anything that’s illegal, make them responsible for content if they’re going to cull content. Give them a reason to appeal to “common carrier”, where they’re not responsible for what’s posted, and as such leave content the heck alone.

Freedom of the press means you don’t get to use someone else’s - even if they’re really influential with theirs.


64 posted on 08/29/2018 4:51:43 PM PDT by ctdonath2 (The Red Queen wasn't kidding.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Eleutheria5
But it would be better to simply support a competitor as Plan A.

From what I have learned about how the entire system protects itself from competition, I do not believe any realistic competitor to Google is possible.

What is YouTube market share?

65 posted on 08/29/2018 6:27:09 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: ctdonath2
Freedom of the press means you don’t get to use someone else’s - even if they’re really influential with theirs.

We aren't talking about "Presses" we are talking about humongous, billion user mass communications systems that manipulate elections.

I've been saying we need to stomp a mudhole in the existing broadcast media, let alone these mega corp leviathans.

Yes, if your system of communications has the ability to reach hundreds of millions of people, the entire purpose of enshrining free speech as a right, requires this mass communications system to be available to all political points of view.

Were it up to me, i'd be prosecuting the networks (ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN) for biased hiring practices because half their employees aren't conservative.

I would be sledgehammering these people with any legal tool I could fine, and I would not stop beating them until people like Mark Steyn are evening news anchors.

We should have Rush Limbaugh on NBC, Mark Steyn on CNN, Thomas Sowell on CBS, and Sarah Palin on ABC.

They are manipulating the American public with their broadcasting power, and until we force them to stop it, we will never solve the problems we have in this nation.

66 posted on 08/29/2018 6:36:09 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Eleutheria5
Did you see this?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3680494/posts

67 posted on 08/29/2018 7:15:33 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: MarchonDC09122009

26,457 signed so far.


68 posted on 08/29/2018 7:17:33 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

I saw this:

“this has nothing to do with the internet other than they’re providing services on the internet.

“This is all with US banks and US credit card processors.”


69 posted on 08/29/2018 7:44:47 PM PDT by NobleFree ("law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: NobleFree

And we should just ignore this because there is absolutely no connection between the one thing and the other.


70 posted on 08/29/2018 8:56:05 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

No. But if that’s the case, all that remains is anti-Trust prosecution. Plan B is a go.


71 posted on 08/30/2018 12:14:00 AM PDT by Eleutheria5 (“If you are not prepared to use force to defend civilization, then be prepared to accept barbarism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

In that case, as I’ve said in a separate thread, anti-Trust is the way to go.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3682982/posts?page=71#71


72 posted on 08/30/2018 12:17:21 AM PDT by Eleutheria5 (“If you are not prepared to use force to defend civilization, then be prepared to accept barbarism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
“this has nothing to do with the internet other than they’re providing services on the internet.

“This is all with US banks and US credit card processors.”

And we should just ignore this because there is absolutely no connection between the one thing and the other.

Two stupid red herrings in one post. To refrain from coercive legislation is not to "ignore"; and a "connection" is insufficient basis for regulating the arena in which the wrong took place rather than the wrongdoer.

73 posted on 08/30/2018 5:32:54 AM PDT by NobleFree ("law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: NobleFree; MarchonDC09122009; Lazamataz

48,759 signed . Almost halfway there.


74 posted on 08/30/2018 3:32:02 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp; All

Excellent, Sir!
Your vigilance is true to your name.


75 posted on 08/30/2018 4:24:29 PM PDT by MarchonDC09122009 (When is our next march on DC? When have we had enough?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Drew68

Perfectly said:

RE: “Apples and oranges. Twitter banning users engaged in perfectly legal speech would be more akin to those old switchboard operators disconnecting phone calls because they didn’t approve of the conversations. “


76 posted on 08/30/2018 4:26:21 PM PDT by MarchonDC09122009 (When is our next march on DC? When have we had enough?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
Freedom frightens many.
77 posted on 08/30/2018 4:33:12 PM PDT by NobleFree ("law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: ctdonath2; All

Lets end this ridiculous slippery slope handringing right now.

1. Facebook, Google, Twitter are ALL International multi-Billion dollar Commumications platforms that governments use for emergency management and community services messages to the public - not much different TELEVISION stations.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/for-hurricane-irma-information-officials-post-on-social-media-1505149661

2. A number of business sectors (Marketing for instance) actually require employees have a Facebook or Twitter account as a condition of employment to ensure identity authentication, and reputation - not much different than an employer expecting a candidate to have a PHONE number.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/adrianagardella/2015/07/01/can-you-require-your-employees-to-be-on-facebook/#774bf8855b9a

http://business.time.com/2012/08/08/does-not-having-a-facebook-page-make-you-suspicious-to-employers/

Free Republic, a small US based private political forum, does not enjoy such international utility.

Case closed.


78 posted on 08/30/2018 4:58:29 PM PDT by MarchonDC09122009 (When is our next march on DC? When have we had enough?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: MarchonDC09122009

zaklee


79 posted on 08/30/2018 5:22:38 PM PDT by morphing libertarian (Use Comey's Report; Indict Hillary now. --- Proud Smelly Walmart Deplorable)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

Went there; did that!


80 posted on 08/30/2018 6:29:07 PM PDT by Taxman (We will never be a truly free people so long as we have the income tax and the IRS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-94 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson