# Trump seeks to end free speech... **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [May 28, 2020, 2:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-seeks-to-end-free-speech/854606 "2020-05-28T14:35:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2020, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-seeks-to-end-free-speech/854606/41 "2020-05-28T21:13:43Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > This seems a strange position to take. If I own a newspaper, and only publish articles by liberal writers, is that stifling free speech? > > Or are only “platforms” subjected to your strange concept of free speech? How are you defining “platform” anyway? Is Reddit a “platform”? Is this message board a “platform”? A newspaper or a radio station isn’t claiming to be a neutral, unbiased communication platform. ---
**Author:** ![iamthewalrus\_3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/258eb7/32.png) [@iamthewalrus\_3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamthewalrus_3)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2020, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-seeks-to-end-free-speech/854606/42 "2020-05-28T21:15:29Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > I’m not sure. But ‘fact checking’ is a dangerous path, because even if every fact check is correct, it can still be used as a political weapon if both sides lie and only one side gets ‘fact checked’. I mean, it’s not dangerous legally. If you run a website, you can let people post with abandon, or fact check just the ones who you disagree with. “Otherwise objectionable” is pretty broad. If you run a website that lets other people post, you can remove or editorialize anything you disagree with. > [@](#): > > I once ran an online information service, and we had an upload area. We were worried about what would happen if people uploaded kiddie porn, bomb plans, or other content that could get us into legal trouble. So we went to a lawyer, who told us we had two options: either leave it all alone and assert no editorial control over it at all (and not even have tools to inspect that content), in which case we would be protected as a common carrier instead of a publisher. You can’t sue the post office if it is used to send kiddie porn or threats. > > On the other hand, if we even tried to assert control over what people uploaded, no matter how egregious, that would open us up to liability for any objectional content we didn’t root out. Seems that your lawyer was incorrect? Section 230 does not require that you manage to remove every bit of objectionable material to provide the liability shield, nor does it require that you be apolitical. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2020, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-seeks-to-end-free-speech/854606/43 "2020-05-28T21:16:38Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > So, **octopus** , you’re saying that you oppose Trump’s move to punish companies for exercising and promoting free speech? Is your opposition to this move sufficient for you to reconsider your overall support of Trump? My overall support of Trump? That man is a nut. I just dislike the far left more as I feel the far left are far more dangerous. And Twitter and such are not pro free speech. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2020, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-seeks-to-end-free-speech/854606/44 "2020-05-28T21:21:26Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > A newspaper or a radio station isn’t claiming to be a neutral, unbiased communication platform. I see. So all Twitter has to do is say “We are not a neutral, unbiased communication platform” and then all is good? ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2020, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-seeks-to-end-free-speech/854606/45 "2020-05-28T21:52:00Z")
> [@El\_Kabong](#): > > IANAL, but I’m pretty sure you are not even slightly damp. > > Personally, I think I’m going to enjoy hearing the judge’s opinion if the White House actually decides to argue in a court filing that appending additional, factual information to an unaltered text somehow constitutes censorship. IANAL, either, but I agree with this. As I heard it said, this is Trump “solving” a problem that doesn’t exist, with power he doesn’t have. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2020, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-seeks-to-end-free-speech/854606/46 "2020-05-28T21:53:04Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > My overall support of Trump? That man is a nut. I just dislike the far left more as I feel the far left are far more dangerous. This is rich when one takes into consideration that the weaponized ignorance of the president was a reason for many dying in the pandemic. > **[U.S. Could Have Saved 36,000 Lives If Social Distancing Started 1 Week...](https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/05/21/860077940/u-s-could-have-saved-36-000-lives-if-social-distancing-started-1-week-earlier-st)** > > The analysis from Columbia University focused on the period from March 15 to May 3, when states and counties implemented "measures enforcing social distancing and restricting individual contact." BTW the conservatives decided to keep the yahoo in power and to continue to look away at his dangerous choices. They own him. > [@octopus](#): > > And Twitter and such are not pro free speech. They are one of the few allowing less restrictions on adult content and more controversial subjects than many other social media groups. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2020, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-seeks-to-end-free-speech/854606/47 "2020-05-28T22:02:28Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > I see. So all Twitter has to do is say “We are not a neutral, unbiased communication platform” and then all is good? If they want to be publishers let them be governed by the same rules other publishers are subjected to. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2020, 10:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-seeks-to-end-free-speech/854606/48 "2020-05-28T22:09:57Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > If they want to be publishers let them be governed by the same rules other publishers are subjected to. That’s not what I asked. It seems as if you think, if I start a website called [onlyfootballposts.com](http://onlyfootballposts.com), I’m not allowed to delete any posts that don’t mention football lest I risk being governed by the same rules as publishers. Is that what you are advocating? ---
**Author:** ![74westy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/74westy/32/3950_2.png) [@74westy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/74westy)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2020, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-seeks-to-end-free-speech/854606/49 "2020-05-28T22:22:06Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > If they want to be publishers let them be governed by the same rules other publishers are subjected to. Are other publishers required to publish everything anyone wants them to publish without comment? Which publishers are these? ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2020, 12:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-seeks-to-end-free-speech/854606/50 "2020-05-29T00:19:38Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > And Twitter and such are not pro free speech. How so? Twitter does not publish anything of their own (beyond notices on how they are running things). They provide a platform for others to stand on and say something. They limit how much those people can say but that is the same deal for everyone and everyone knows the deal before they walk on the stage. Pretty much anyone can line up for their turn on the stage. If you started **OctoTwitter** how would you make it a “more” free speech platform (and let’s assume you want to prevent things like kiddie porn from being published)? ---
**Author:** ![Joey\_P](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/919ad9/32.png) [@Joey\_P](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Joey_P)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2020, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-seeks-to-end-free-speech/854606/51 "2020-05-29T00:23:03Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > A newspaper or a radio station isn’t claiming to be a neutral, unbiased communication platform. Like Fox News claiming to be Fair and Balanced? Is a private company legally bound to uphold their their mission statement, slogan, name or anything else for that matter? ---
**Author:** ![bengangmo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@bengangmo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bengangmo)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2020, 12:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-seeks-to-end-free-speech/854606/52 "2020-05-29T00:41:09Z")
Just read through the full text of the EO “© The Department of Justice shall review the viewpoint-based speech restrictions imposed by each online platform identified in the report described in subsection (b) of this section and assess whether any online platforms are problematic vehicles for government speech due to viewpoint discrimination, deception to consumers, or other bad practices.” WERE there justice dept to find that twitter is a “problematic vehicle” for government speech and shouldn’t receive advertising dollars, would that then mean, that as Trump’s tweets have previously been found to be official communication, he also would be banned from Twitter by the government? ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2020, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-seeks-to-end-free-speech/854606/53 "2020-05-29T00:56:42Z")
IANAL, but it looks like Trump and his buddy Barr want to use regulatory power to influence how the statutes are interpreted/enforced (or not) with regard to the Sen Tel-com Act of 1996. Social media came about a decade after the act, so they’ve kind of been incorporated into the existing legislation. With little hope that the House would go along with regulating social media for Trump’s benefit, one thing he might do is use the full weight of federal executive power to intimidate specific social media companies. Something that ordinary folk need to understand about authoritarian rule is that they tend to create their own authoritarian-based form of capitalism. They reward companies that play ball and punish those who don’t. Point being, if party leadership can meet with Zuck and get him to agree to host fake news without fact checks, then that Trump tells his legions of conservatives to follow them in a move to Facebook and Instagram. Twitter becomes the “liberal” social media network - the CNN or MSNBC of social media while Facebook and Insta become Fox News or OANN. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2020, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-seeks-to-end-free-speech/854606/54 "2020-06-01T21:12:59Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > That’s not what I asked. It seems as if you think, if I start a website called [onlyfootballposts.com](http://onlyfootballposts.com), I’m not allowed to delete any posts that don’t mention football lest I risk being governed by the same rules as publishers. > > Is that what you are advocating? I’m not **octopus** , but that is my opinion. If you’re going to sift through submissions and ascertain whether they are appropriate for your site, it is your responsibility to throw out the kiddie porn. The exception was made so that companies like Comcast don’t have to sift through each network packet and search for criminal activity, the same way your phone company isn’t liable if you use their phone network to plot a terrorist attack. It wasn’t made with social media or web apps in mind. ~Max [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-seeks-to-end-free-speech/854606.md?page=2)