• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Social Media Executive Order

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/snapchat-stop-promoting-president-trumps-account-1297031

Update Snapchat will not promote content from the White House.

Snapchat will no longer promote President Trump’s account on its Discover media platform, the company said Wednesday morning.

Evan Spiegel-led Snap said it made the decision after determining that Trump’s comments could incite violence. The company pointed to tweets from Trump over the weekend in which he threatened to send “vicious dogs” and “ominous weapons” to stop the protests that have been taking place across the country in response to the May 25 death of George Floyd at the hands of the police.

“We will not amplify voices who incite racial violence and injustice by giving them free promotion on Discover,” a company spokeswoman said in a statement. “Racial violence and injustice have no place in our society and we stand together with all who seek peace, love, equality, and justice in America.”
Click to expand...
 
https://www.vox.com/recode/2020/6/3/21279559/donald-trump-evan-spiegel-snapchat-snap-twitter

Now Trump goes after the leader of Snapchat over his statement.

Donald Trump’s campaign expanded its war against Silicon Valley tech companies on Wednesday to include Snapchat, blasting the platform for taking some of the most aggressive measures yet to curtail Trump’s incendiary rhetoric.

Snapchat’s parent company, Snap, on Wednesday said that it would stop promoting Trump’s campaign account on its Discover tab, which has been a strategic priority for Trump to reach the younger voters who are Snapchat’s core audience. That decision provoked a searing statement from Trump’s campaign manager and instantly made Snapchat and its CEO a flashpoint in the escalating fight between Trump and tech.

“Snapchat is trying to rig the 2020 election, illegally using their corporate funding to promote Joe Biden and suppress President Trump,” Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale said in a statement. “Snapchat hates that so many of their users watch the President’s content and so they are actively engaging in voter suppression. If you’re a conservative, they do not want to hear from you, they do not want you to vote. They view you as a deplorable and they do not want you to exist on their platform.”
Click to expand...
 
RadioPatrol said:
Now Trump goes after the leader of Snapchat over his statement.
Click to expand...

One could easily use their exact same argument to say that conservative talk radio is using the free public airwaves to rig the 2020 election for Trump.

Therefore the FCC must step in and remove all bias from talk radio.
 
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/07/sci...erg-urge-facebook-to-curb-misinformation.html

Scientists who get funding from the Chan Zuckerberg foundation are now putting pressure on how to deal with the content from the White House.


Scientists who receive funding from Mark Zuckerberg’s philanthropic organization, the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative (CZI), have urged the Facebook CEO to do more to stem the spread of misinformation and incendiary speech on the social network.

The letter, which is addressed to Zuckerberg from scientists who are currently or were previously backed by CZI, was published on Saturday. The Washington Post first reported the news.

The missive makes the case that Facebook acknowledges in its own user policies that news spreading which is not vetted for factual accuracy can result in “confusion and a mistrust of experts.” The scientists said they were “disconcerted” that Facebook did nothing after President Donald Trump published the statement “when the looting starts, the shooting starts” amid social unrest in the wake of the police killing of George Floyd, an unarmed black man.
Click to expand...
 
https://www.mediapost.com/publicati...lican-senators-urge-fcc-to-crack-down-on.html

Digital rights groups and the ad industry view President Trump's recent order regarding social media as a threat to the First Amendment.

But four Republican senators said Tuesday the order marks an “important step” to addressing “censorship” by social media companies.

In a letter to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai, the GOP lawmakers say social media platforms “have increasingly engaged in partisan editorializing, censorship of Chinese dissidents, and a host of politically motivated speech policing.”

“Social media companies have become involved in a range of editorial and promotional activity,” Sens. Marco Rubio (Florida), Kelly Loeffler (Georgia), Kevin Cramer (North Dakota) and Josh Hawley (Missouri) write to Pai. “Like publishers, they monetize, edit, and otherwise editorialize user content. It is time to take a fresh look at Section 230 and to interpret the vague standard of 'good faith' with specific guidelines and direction.”
Click to expand...
 
But four Republican senators said Tuesday the order marks an “important step” to addressing “censorship” by social media companies.
Click to expand...

Just about everything these senators talk about could also apply to message boards like this one.

To me, this focus on Section 230 is a smokescreen. The real justification social media uses for what they do is in their terms of service.

Social media sites aren't public forums, although their content can be viewed publicly.

One possible solution is to put all content behind a membership wall.
 
TheBigA said:
Just about everything these senators talk about could also apply to message boards like this one.

To me, this focus on Section 230 is a smokescreen. The real justification social media uses for what they do is in their terms of service.

Social media sites aren't public forums, although their content can be viewed publicly.

One possible solution is to put all content behind a membership wall.
Click to expand...

I expect the house to take down the Social Media Orders given the situation they are in.
 
The New York Times points out that the Republican Party platform hasn't been updated since 2016, and says this:

“The survival of the internet as we know it is at risk," it reads. "Its gravest peril originates in the White House."'

https://t.co/N3ofYS5QXM?amp=1

Of course the platform itself won't be updated until the convention in August. But it's still fun to read.
 
Although I didn't read it allI think it's hilarious that the platform condemns the "current president". The Lincoln Project group should be able to go along with that one! :cool:
 
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/11/technology/biden-facebook-misinformation.html

Joe Biden is now having a say on Social Media now that its up for debate.

WASHINGTON — The Biden presidential campaign, emboldened by a recent surge in support, is going after a new target: Facebook.

After months of privately battling the tech giant over President Trump’s free rein on its social network, the campaign will begin urging its millions of supporters to demand that Facebook strengthen its rules against misinformation and to hold politicians accountable for harmful comments.

On Thursday, the campaign will circulate a petition and an open letter to Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook’s chief executive, to change the company’s hands-off approach to political speech. The petition will be sent to millions of supporters on its email and text message lists and through social media, including Facebook, imploring them to sign the letter. The campaign will also release a video this week to be shared across social media to explain the issue.
Click to expand...
 
The Justice Department will ask Congress to create some legislation that will hold Facebook, Google, and Twitter liable for lawsuits regarding certain content:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/06/17/doj-barr-section-230/

As we've said, all this would do is make it even more likely that these companies would remove questionable content to protect itself from lawsuits.

This proposal is directly counter to the 2016 Republican Party Platform, that said it is opposed to such legislation:

“The survival of the internet as we know it is at risk,” the platform reads. “Its gravest peril originates in the White House, the current occupant of which has launched a campaign, both at home and internationally, to subjugate it to agents of government.”
Click to expand...
 
TheBigA said:
The Justice Department will ask Congress to create some legislation that will hold Facebook, Google, and Twitter liable for lawsuits regarding certain content:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/06/17/doj-barr-section-230/

As we've said, all this would do is make it even more likely that these companies would remove questionable content to protect itself from lawsuits.

This proposal is directly counter to the 2016 Republican Party Platform, that said it is opposed to such legislation:
Click to expand...


What's going to happen to Police Brutality videos though given that its "questionable content" Online but at the same time these videos are there for historical reasons too over civil rights and racial issues in court cases. Also News outlets have picked up some of the brutality videos too from outlets such as Youtube, facebook and Twitter.
 
Here's an opinion from Senator Tom Cotton expressing his party's view that Twitter and other social media should lose liability protection:

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/twitter-tried-censor-me-they-lost-sen-tom-cotton

He says "Twitter was once a place for the free exchange of ideas." What he doesn't say is that was before the president used it to make threats against US citizens and other unpleasant statements. There is no question he has pushed Twitter beyond what it once was, and that's not a good thing. They're left trying to put the toothpaste back in the tube.

The other thing Cotton doesn't say is that Twitter is not a public place, owned by the government, where free speech is protected by the Constitution. Instead it's a private club, where members agree to terms of service. He complains about how the CEO of Twitter runs his business. But the fact is it's HIS business. It's like complaining that Pizza Hut must sell hamburgers when their business is making pizza. The internet may be free and open, but these sites are private businesses. Once you enter them, you've entered someone's private property. That is likely to be the debate if this goes to Congress or the courts.
 
Google has removed The Federalist from its ad network due to objectionable content. This has angered conservative groups:

https://beforeitsnews.com/u-s-polit...es-in-strike-against-free-speech-2580151.html

As a result, several conservative senators have proposed a law that would require them to treat sites "fairly."

https://video.foxnews.com/v/6165278038001/

This is not unlike advertisers saying they don't want their ads placed in controversial radio programs. Quite a few advertisers have that right with radio. Why not the internet?
 
Facebook has removed ads run by President Donald Trump's reelection campaign for using "a banned hate group's symbol," a spokesperson confirmed Thursday.

"We removed these posts and ads for violating our policy against organized hate. Our policy prohibits using a banned hate group's symbol to identify political prisoners without the context that condemns or discusses the symbol," Andy Stone, a Facebook spokesperson, said in a statement.

The Washington Post reported that the advertisements featured a red inverted triangle that was once used by Nazi Germany to identify political prisoners.
Click to expand...

https://abc7.com/politics/facebook-removes-trump-ads-for-using-hate-group-symbol-/6254366/

The President has been flagged for Hate Speech Content by Facebook.
 
https://abc7.com/politics/twitter-flags-trumps-tweet-of-doctored-racist-baby-video/6255713/

The President has been flagged on Twitter for questionable content


LONDON -- Twitter has slapped another label on a tweet by President Donald Trump, this time warning that a video he shared was doctored and escalating the social media company's crackdown on one of its most widely followed users.

After Trump tweeted the video late Thursday, Twitter took the rare step of adding a warning that it was "manipulated media" and linked to a page that said multiple journalists confirmed the clip was edited to make it look like a CNN broadcast. The video remains visible in Trump's timeline.

The doctored clip used footage from a video that went viral last year of two toddlers, one black, one white, which this station used for a story it did on the boys' friendship.
Click to expand...
 
TheBigA said:
several conservative senators have proposed a law that would require them to treat sites "fairly."
Click to expand...

You really just have to laugh at these buffoons. Aren’t these conservatives the same ones who killed “net neutrality” so they could have an advantage?
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom