Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Blue_true

(31,261 posts)
96. No, I didn't say the social media companies have no incentive to moderate.
Fri Jan 1, 2021, 08:39 PM
Jan 2021

They have had plenty of incentive, they just have not done it for whatever reason they put forward at the time. They simply have failed at their social responsibility to moderate speech that any sane person would see as dangerous to the physical well being of the target(s) of that speech, that failure has to end.

Because atreides1 Dec 2020 #1
You didn't post a justification for not repealing Section 230. Blue_true Dec 2020 #14
Section 230 specifically ALLOWS moderation. NutmegYankee Dec 2020 #28
Trump was not moderated for years on Facebook and Twitter. Blue_true Dec 2020 #43
People always could sue Trump. NutmegYankee Dec 2020 #47
I want to make the Internet the tool for positive intellectual exchange Blue_true Dec 2020 #51
Read up on Stratton Oakmont, Inc. v. Prodigy Services Co. and get back to me. NutmegYankee Dec 2020 #55
No citizen has deep enough pockets to sue Trump...you seriously don't understand how it all works. Demsrule86 Dec 2020 #38
The short answer is because we care about their Right to free speech, Volaris Jan 2021 #92
This message was self-deleted by its author Blue_true Dec 2020 #15
Why do you think the repeal should be tied to Covid relief, Crunchy Frog Dec 2020 #44
No. But McConnell appears to be set to tie it to the relief. Blue_true Dec 2020 #48
So you want what Mitch and Trump want. Crunchy Frog Dec 2020 #58
I am perfectly willing to stand and watch both of them stab themselves Blue_true Dec 2020 #75
And you didn't answer any of my questions. Crunchy Frog Dec 2020 #60
I am not proposing giving in. I am proposing letting Trump and McConnell Blue_true Dec 2020 #76
So disingenuous it is then. Thanks for letting us know. Crunchy Frog Dec 2020 #88
I am not trying to be a smart ass. Blue_true Dec 2020 #90
This message was self-deleted by its author Blue_true Dec 2020 #91
No. But McConnell appears to be set to tie it to the relief. Blue_true Dec 2020 #49
And doesn't that tell you something? The legal issues and effects Hortensis Dec 2020 #62
Removal of Section 230 will force social media companies to censure Blue_true Dec 2020 #74
No, I lack the simplifying gene. Both parties have agreed for years Hortensis Dec 2020 #77
Social media companies have failed to follow Section 230. Blue_true Dec 2020 #78
To me it has nothing to do with a check I'd receive, but I have Hortensis Dec 2020 #81
I am not about the money, although people that need it should get it. Blue_true Dec 2020 #85
Hello! You've Been Referred Here Because You're Wrong About Section 230 muriel_volestrangler Jan 2021 #93
The interesting thing is I didn't say any of the "if you said". Blue_true Jan 2021 #94
"If you said "Because of Section 230, websites have no incentive to moderate!" muriel_volestrangler Jan 2021 #95
No, I didn't say the social media companies have no incentive to moderate. Blue_true Jan 2021 #96
Section 230 protects DU NutmegYankee Dec 2020 #2
I post inaccurate stuff on occasion. But I never post purposely malicious stuff. Blue_true Dec 2020 #17
People who might object wouldn't sue you...they would go after the sites which have way more Demsrule86 Dec 2020 #23
I post inaccurate stuff on occasion. But I never post purposely malicious stuff. Blue_true Dec 2020 #18
No, you can be sued, DU cannot under Section 230. NutmegYankee Dec 2020 #25
Maybe I am old-fashioned, maybe I have seen that in Court, truth Blue_true Dec 2020 #31
What planet are you from? The American Rule is both sides pay their own fees NutmegYankee Dec 2020 #33
In Florida, a person can file a counterclaim lawsuit if sued and Blue_true Dec 2020 #40
And the other 49 states? NutmegYankee Dec 2020 #50
I don't know about the other 48, my guess is they have some version of the Florida Blue_true Dec 2020 #71
You've stated you're not a lawyer, so that may explain why you don't know how hard it is to win onenote Dec 2020 #63
A person like Trump has been a repeat offender. Blue_true Dec 2020 #72
This message was self-deleted by its author Blue_true Dec 2020 #73
You don't understand...sure they could go after you but they want to go after the sites and Demsrule86 Dec 2020 #32
Then the sites should moderate knowingly false posts. That is not censorship. nt Blue_true Dec 2020 #46
Twitter does, that's why Trump is complaing about their disclaimers. ahoysrcsm Dec 2020 #67
Twitter only recently started putting in the disclaimers, under public pressure Blue_true Dec 2020 #69
And yet, Trump is butt hurt and want's to get rid of 230 because thy use disclaimers. ahoysrcsm Dec 2020 #86
So now, they simply delete his posts all together for being lies. Blue_true Dec 2020 #87
This message was self-deleted by its author Blue_true Dec 2020 #70
No, it doesn't work that way...and opinion is often not false or true...but people with deep Demsrule86 Dec 2020 #79
You are missing my point. An opinion is not the same as a knowing lie. Blue_true Dec 2020 #83
This message was self-deleted by its author Blue_true Dec 2020 #84
Courts are not about truth and justice... lame54 Dec 2020 #42
Repeal of 230 would be like the repeal of the fairness doctrine times a billion. Squinch Dec 2020 #3
I don't see it that way at all. Blue_true Dec 2020 #7
That is most certainly not true. People are sued over all kinds of things and fighting such suits hlthe2b Dec 2020 #19
If you counter-sue and ask for damages and Court costs (including Lawyer fees), Blue_true Dec 2020 #26
I don't think you understand libel and slander laws. LisaL Dec 2020 #27
Clearly he does not. nt NutmegYankee Dec 2020 #29
I'm sorry, but you are really misinformed. hlthe2b Dec 2020 #30
I don't see it that way at all. Blue_true Dec 2020 #8
That is bullshit. Just look at the crazy shit the GOP does no...we need 230 and McConnell gets Demsrule86 Dec 2020 #11
The GOP does what it does BECAUSE they won't get sued for posting Blue_true Dec 2020 #20
230 allowed twitter to take down Trump's lies without it he could have lied with impunity. Demsrule86 Dec 2020 #34
That isn't correct. Trump lied with impunity on Twitter since 2008. Blue_true Dec 2020 #41
And they still won't. Fox went to court and was given permission to lie...this would be used to Demsrule86 Dec 2020 #80
What are you a lawyer? Because I don't have the money to defend everything I post...I can't Demsrule86 Dec 2020 #12
I am not a lawyer and I am not lawsuit happy. Blue_true Dec 2020 #22
An individual can already be sued. BarackTheVote Dec 2020 #39
Then sites should moderate content before posting it. Blue_true Dec 2020 #45
Reviewing every post or tweet or YouTube video before it goes up is BarackTheVote Dec 2020 #52
a PRACTICAL solution to what you're concerned about BarackTheVote Dec 2020 #56
Exactly. Demsrule86 Dec 2020 #13
I also don't understand why Democrats would want to defend it either, Blue_true Dec 2020 #4
The posts upstream from yours explain very well. Repeal would mean the end of sites like DU hlthe2b Dec 2020 #6
Wow Bev54 Dec 2020 #54
because we passed a stand alone bill that has the support of the American people questionseverything Dec 2020 #5
Section 230 protects all website and all user...the progressive message will disappear without it. Demsrule86 Dec 2020 #9
This message was self-deleted by its author moondust Dec 2020 #64
Section 230 has nothing to do with social media. It's about encryption. Renew Deal Dec 2020 #10
That is untrue...it is part of the decency act and it removed liability from sites for what their Demsrule86 Dec 2020 #21
Sorry, I should say the Section 230 debate. Renew Deal Dec 2020 #57
Senate bill rso Dec 2020 #16
That is in the military bill...nothing to do with the 2000 bill. Demsrule86 Dec 2020 #35
Wow greenjar_01 Dec 2020 #24
Anyone confused about Section 230 should read post #21. SMC22307 Dec 2020 #36
So true, if Trump said water was wet still check uponit7771 Dec 2020 #61
As long as it's not used as a partisan weapon, I don't have a problem with an election commission. Crunchy Frog Dec 2020 #37
Bullshit. This was a fair and honest election and having a commision will make it seem otherwise. Demsrule86 Dec 2020 #82
This is silly. Wikipedia has been sued multiple times over user content. joshcryer Dec 2020 #53
This message was self-deleted by its author jcgoldie Dec 2020 #59
I'll bet Dump hates 230. moondust Dec 2020 #65
He has a hard-on for Jack Dorsey and is always whining about how "conservative voices"... SMC22307 Dec 2020 #68
Section 230 also protects DU JonLP24 Dec 2020 #66
... William769 Dec 2020 #89
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why would Democrats be so...»Reply #96