Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What's in Trump's executive order on social media?
Fox News ^ | 28 May 2020 | Morgan Phillips

Posted on 05/28/2020 5:37:47 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum

President Trump signed an executive order to reign in social media giants on Thursday.

The order comes after Twitter added a fact check label to one of the president’s tweets about mail-in ballots. What’s in the order?

Reigning in of Section 230 protections 

The order does not remove Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 (CDA), but it would cut federal funding for tech companies that engage in censorship and political conduct, as well as remove statutory liability protections.

Section 230 says: "No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.” In other words, online platforms that host or republish speech are protected from a wide range of laws that could otherwise be used to hold them legally responsible for what others say and do. (Copyright law, which has a strong constitutional foundation, ordinarily does require sites like Twitter to remove offending content, or face liability.)

"My executive order calls for new regulations under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act to make it so that social media companies that engage in censoring any political conduct will not be able to keep their liability shield," the president said.

“Immunity should not extend beyond its text and purpose to provide protection for those who purport to provide users a forum for free and open speech, but in reality use their power over a vital means of communication to engage in deceptive or pretextual actions stifling free and...

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: ballotharvesting; cdasection230; censorbusting; electionfraud; votefrauddatabase; voteharvesting

1 posted on 05/28/2020 5:37:47 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Here’s the link for what’s in it.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-preventing-online-censorship/


2 posted on 05/28/2020 5:42:25 PM PDT by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
Anyone see any unintended consequences in this for say, Free Republic🤔?
3 posted on 05/28/2020 5:45:18 PM PDT by buckalfa (Post no bills.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: caww

yep ... and here’s the white house synopsis:

In the next few hours, you may hear a lot about this Executive Order. Leftwing media will claim it addresses a fake problem because tech bias doesn’t exist. Democrats in Congress will say the President is exceeding his authority. Some in the Beltway establishment will say the order doesn’t do that much in the first place.

All of these are lies. Here are a few of the key actions in President Trump’s order:

Makes it U.S. policy that platforms who selectively edit, censor, or are not acting in “good faith” with regards to content will not receive the liability protection included in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act

Directs the Commerce Department to petition the FCC to make clarifying rules on Section 230 in line with U.S. policy

Helps stop millions of taxpayer dollars from being wasted by federal agencies on advertising with biased social media platforms

Ensures the Justice Department will review more than 16,000 complaints about politically motivated censorship that were collected by the White House in advance of a Social Media Summit held last year

Mobilizes State Attorneys General—who have massive subpoena and consumer protection authorities—to ensure social media platforms are not engaging in unfair or deceptive acts or practices

Acts as federal law and lists the many ways in which tech platforms act with bias against viewpoints they disagree with

Massive corporations that treat millions of American citizens unfairly shouldn’t expect special privileges and protections under the law. With President Trump’s Executive Order today, our country is one step closer to having an honest, fair public debate.


4 posted on 05/28/2020 5:48:00 PM PDT by catnipman (Cat Nipman: Vote Republican in 2012 and only be called racist one more time!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

I think twitter has already backed off. Wouldn’t surprise me a bit if both sides now just let it fade away.


5 posted on 05/28/2020 5:53:54 PM PDT by Jim Robinson (Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: catnipman

Thank you for an exceptional explanation!


6 posted on 05/28/2020 5:54:36 PM PDT by airborne (I don't always scream at the TV but when I do it's hockey season!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: buckalfa
Anyone see any unintended consequences in this for say, Free Republic?

I don't think so. Jim has always had a pretty responsible policy, and Freepers don't dox each other, or libel each other, or call for violence upon each other. We are pretty free with insults to public figures, but that's legal.

7 posted on 05/28/2020 5:56:21 PM PDT by A_perfect_lady (The greatest wealth is to live content with little. -Plato)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: buckalfa
Anyone see any unintended consequences in this for say, Free Republic🤔?

I understood from reading FR's pages and agreements before joining that it represented itself as a discussion forum with certain philosophical assumptions. It certainly has never seemed to present itself as a neutral public utility. Constitutional protections of free speech seem to me to be explicitly aimed at protecting such digitized "broadsides" as we see here.

I think FR would be considered the contrary situation to FB and Twit, which claim to have no point of view except "community standards" of niceness--which they uphold principally when judging conservative political speech, it seems.

8 posted on 05/28/2020 5:56:37 PM PDT by SamuraiScot (am)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Wouldn’t surprise me a bit if both sides now just let it fade away.

I don't know, opening them up to lawsuits takes it out of anyone's hands. It could end up being the Wild West in terms of lawsuits.

And I dearly hope they lose federal funding... I didn't even know they got it in the first place! Why should they? They are rich enough already.

9 posted on 05/28/2020 5:58:25 PM PDT by A_perfect_lady (The greatest wealth is to live content with little. -Plato)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

I think Trump is setting up to thwart FB, Google, and Twit’s plan to distort all digital content on Earth between now and November to manipulate the electorate like Pavlov’s dog to hate the President and vote against him.


10 posted on 05/28/2020 6:02:15 PM PDT by SamuraiScot (am)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

It means Internet hosts that are not engaged in the content cannot be held liable for those that post the content. If they do censor, contribute, or engage in any way then they can be held liable.

Internet hosts MUST censor criminal content from their site per federal law, but that has strict definitions and is very limited in scope. However, if a host goes into providing content then they lose their host status.

How is this important?

If a poster posts libel on a web site, the site, if not a host but a contributor, can also be sued for that libel.

Every single website that hosts content should take seriously the liability of libel. Deep pockets like Google, Reddit, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc., are all deeply concerned about existential lawsuits that can put them out of business.


11 posted on 05/28/2020 6:05:55 PM PDT by CodeToad (Arm Up! They Have!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Massive publicly-held corporations making money off the system treat millions of American citizens unfairly
shouldn’t expect special privileges and protections under the law. President Trump’s Executive Order brings us
and our country one step closer to having an honest, fair public debate.....MAGA.
12 posted on 05/28/2020 6:07:14 PM PDT by Liz ( Our side has 8 trillion bullets; the other side doesn't know which bathroom to use.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

13 posted on 05/28/2020 6:08:38 PM PDT by CodeToad (Arm Up! They Have!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Bump


14 posted on 05/28/2020 6:12:45 PM PDT by foreverfree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SamuraiScot
If President Trump doesn't go after the far left social media tech giants now, he stands a good chance of losing in November.
He should have done this long ago.
Next step is an EO on crushing voter fraud.
Then sack Wray and replace him with Ric Grenell as acting FBI Director.
15 posted on 05/28/2020 6:22:08 PM PDT by SmokingJoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
Doe this make it possible for “deplatformed” and “depersoned” individuals grievously harmed by said censorship able to sue?

I want to see Laura Loomer and Alex Jones back online where ever they choose to be. Perhaps with some compensation for being individually targeted and “edited” for their views.

16 posted on 05/28/2020 6:31:37 PM PDT by Caipirabob (Communists...Socialists...Fascists & AntiFa...Democrats...Traitors... Who can tell the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Like a shot across the bow?


17 posted on 05/28/2020 6:43:31 PM PDT by Ronniesque
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: catnipman

If that is what this does, and conferences, it would be fantastic. I am more afraid this will just be a political talking point, where the election. Rather than concrete actions, such as stopping the Censureship of conservative voices including the president’s.


18 posted on 05/28/2020 7:05:53 PM PDT by Reno89519 (Buy American, Hire American! End All Worker Visa Programs. Replace Visa Workers w/ American Workers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

This is promising, I just read the full text of the executive order, and I’m impressed that it seems well thought out, contrary to some of the things that the White House has put out in the last couple years which have gotten shut down before the ink dried. I suspect that twitters actions yesterday were in direct anticipation of this executive order.


19 posted on 05/28/2020 7:21:32 PM PDT by Reno89519 (Buy American, Hire American! End All Worker Visa Programs. Replace Visa Workers w/ American Workers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: caww; catnipman

Thank you guys


20 posted on 05/28/2020 8:54:02 PM PDT by Steve Van Doorn (*in my best Eric Cartman voice* 'I love you, guys')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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