Monday, March 25, 2019
Devin Nunes sues Twitter. Censorship?
Below is an excerpt from a very derisive article in the Leftist Boston Globe about the Devin Nunes lawsuit. It's almost solid abuse, mostly in the form of poorly-founded mockery. And in typical Leftist style ends in a non-sequitur. It claims that Nunes is promoting political censorship when he compains about what is said of him. But that is a crock. Defamation and libel have never been protected speech. So Nunes is changing precisely nothing in speech rules
California Representative Devin Nunes announced a $250 million defamation lawsuit he filed against Twitter as well as three users — Republican strategist Liz Mair, and two parody accounts: the now-suspended @DevinNunesMom and @DevinCow.
Nunes’s suit claims that Twitter is “shadow-banning” conservatives and conservative content, knowingly hosting abusive content (otherwise known as “Twitter”), ignoring complaints about abusive content, and failing to self-regulate and “thereby selectively amplifying the message of defamers such as Mair, Devin Nunes’ Mom and Devin Nunes’ cow.”
Whatever Nunes’s reasoning, the lawsuit recenters a dangerous notion of a state-side regulation of political critique, which, in the hands of this administration, I am going to guess would be handled less gently than migrant children.
SOURCE
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
A strange situation has developed where the law does not recognise Facebook/Twitter et al as publishers per the Communications Decency Act, but Facebook/Twitter want to - and are often expected to - control the content of material published on their channels.
These two ideas cannot co-exist.
Facebook and Twitter are editors, pure and simple. That means they are no longer protected by the "safe harbor" act - they are publishers. As soon as they started regulating legal content and opinions, they became editors. They should be treated as such.
Post a Comment