DeSantis proposes daily fines for Big Tech that deplatform political candidates

Concart said:
Not exactly, but similar. Probably close enough for your feeble mind. That being said, politicians are not a protected class. Which is why your analogy is for simpletons. Perfect coming from you.
Click to expand...

obviously if Florida passes this law they would be a protected class.......where did you think "protection" came from.......
 
Concart said:
OMFG you are just too stupid for words. No, they would not become a protected class. You are a moron. I have no words.
Click to expand...

????....a class becomes protected when a legislature passes a law allowing legal action to be taken for violations of their rights.......hence things like the Civil Rights Act or the Elliot-Larsen Act.......or the Americans With Disabilities Act.....

here is an article that explains what happens when a class receives "protection"....
https://www.natlawreview.com/article/michigan-expands-protections-lgbt-individuals#:~:text=The%20Elliott%2DLarsen%20Civil%20Rights,to%20the%20Michigan%20Civil%20Rights
 
PostmodernProphet said:
????....a class becomes protected when a legislature passes a law allowing legal action to be taken for violations of their rights.......hence things like the Civil Rights Act or the Elliot-Larsen Act.......or the Americans With Disabilities Act.....

here is an article that explains what happens when a class receives "protection"....
https://www.natlawreview.com/article/michigan-expands-protections-lgbt-individuals#:~:text=The%20Elliott%2DLarsen%20Civil%20Rights,to%20the%20Michigan%20Civil%20Rights
Click to expand...

Okay, let me get this straight. You want to pass a law that prohibits interfering in an election by forbidding a campaign from being deplatformed. So you are suggesting that would make a political campaign a protected class. I was correct. You are a moron. I have no words.
 
Concart said:
Okay, let me get this straight. You want to pass a law that prohibits interfering in an election by forbidding a campaign from being deplatformed. So you are suggesting that would make a political campaign a protected class. I was correct. You are a moron. I have no words.
Click to expand...

People who believe in Alternative Facts and live in an Alternative Universe want to make whatever rules suit them best regardless of logic, reason or fairness.

The Republican Party has a rough 4-6 years facing it.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
People who believe in Alternative Facts and live in an Alternative Universe want to make whatever rules suit them best regardless of logic, reason or fairness.

The Republican Party has a rough 4-6 years facing it.
Click to expand...

It is sublime. Basically, the proposal goes like this: Private social media companies may enforce their terms of service.... except in the case of a politician. No TOS for them, they can say whatever the fuck they want. Because they are a 'protected class'. The stupidity needed to advance that argument leaves me speechless. I agree, I think more on the high side of that time frame.
 
Concart said:
. So you are suggesting that would make a political campaign a protected class.
Click to expand...

no.....I am saying it would make political candidates a protected class.......that is the natural result of legislation creating protections for a class of persons..........I am sorry if you have no words......I expect that is the result of your ignorance......
 
Concart said:
It is sublime. Basically, the proposal goes like this: Private social media companies may enforce their terms of service.... except in the case of a politician. No TOS for them, they can say whatever the fuck they want. Because they are a 'protected class'. The stupidity needed to advance that argument leaves me speechless. I agree, I think more on the high side of that time frame.
Click to expand...

dude, it isn't that complicated.....if a statute is enacted that says social media companies may not enforce those terms of service against people engaged in running for a political office then the company may not enforce those terms of service against people engaged in running for a political office.......does that confuse you?.......does the obvious reason for that type of protection seem unclear to you?........would you feel differently if a candidate was refused a public platform if they spoke favorably about BLM?.......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
no.....I am saying it would make political candidates a protected class.......that is the natural result of legislation creating protections for a class of persons..........I am sorry if you have no words......I expect that is the result of your ignorance......
Click to expand...

Protected from what? That's the point. Those campaigns are being removed because they violate the terms of service, not because they are politicians. Is this really that difficult for you to figure out?
 
PostmodernProphet said:
dude, it isn't that complicated.....if a statute is enacted that says social media companies may not enforce those terms of service against people engaged in running for a political office then the company may not enforce those terms of service against people engaged in running for a political office.......does that confuse you?.......does the obvious reason for that type of protection seem unclear to you?........would you feel differently if a candidate was refused a public platform if they spoke favorably about BLM?.......
Click to expand...

OMFG are you fucking serious? That's not what protective class means. Jesus you are just beyond stupid. Being in a protected class means you are protected from actions taken SOLELY BECAUSE YOU ARE A PART OF THAT CLASS. You are not immune and cannot be made immune from a private companies terms of service. I tried, but you are just too fucking stupid. Off you go.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
While it is nice to see Conservatives waking up this smells like closing the barn doors after the horses are already gone.

It's too late to do anything about the Tech Overlords, The Revolution has no intention of giving up this great power, and they run the country now...Conservatives are the hunted now, they dont get a say.
Click to expand...

Conservatives would not favor more government regulation just because they don't like something. "Big Tech" seems to be the new villain replacing the Koch Brothers, Soros, MSM, etc. We need an enemy to blame for the latest evils.
 
anatta said:
Florida’s Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis on Tuesday took aim at the country’s largest technology companies, which he characterized as a group of "monopoly communications platforms" based on the way they have grown to regulate public discourse.

"These platforms have changed from neutral platforms that provided Americans with the freedom to speak, to enforcers of preferred narratives," DeSantis said during a press conference. "Consequently, these platforms have played an increasingly decisive role in elections and have negatively impacted Americans who dissent from orthodoxies favored by the big tech cartel."

DeSantis targeted tech companies over content moderation, which he equated to political manipulation, as he reiterated a belief held by many conservatives that Silicon Valley is biased against viewpoints emanating from the right.

In an effort to keep Big Tech out of Florida’s political sphere, DeSantis proposed a number of measures including a $100,000 daily fine for companies that deplatform political candidates. Additionally, actions taken by companies to effectively promote a candidate will be considered campaign contributions.

DeSantis proposed measures to enhance user rights as well, including allowing individuals and the Florida attorney general to sue companies over violations of individual protections, as well as requiring companies to provide full disclosures of actions taken against individuals for violating policies.

The Florida governor took issue with several recent – and controversial – content moderation policies that have been taken up by the largest social media players. For example, he said social media users who chose to follow President Donald Trump were unable to do so after his accounts were locked on Facebook and Twitter following the role his inflammatory rhetoric allegedly played in inciting the deadly riots on Capitol Hill earlier this month.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/desantis-fines-big-tech-political-candidates


DeSantis also went after Amazon for effectively forcing free speech app Parler – favored by conservatives and Trump supporters, as well as some right-wing extremists – offline over its decision not to moderate content related to the Jan. 6 siege in the same manner as Facebook and Twitter.
Click to expand...

Very much like what they have in China, with websites and publishers being required to put out the parties position.
 
Hoosier Daddy said:
nazis, you dumbass pig, would be the ones favoring the government to force private businesses to post offensive shit whether they like it or not, as long as it what that government likes. get it, stupid bitch? fuck desantis. fuck trump. fuck you. start your own goddamn lying ass nutbar platform.
Click to expand...




so many of these tech social media companies take federal subsidies and get tax breaks, making then quasi government owned.



It's people like you who are fucked supporting tech oligarchs deplatforming entire viewpoints.


you wouldnt be so cheery if it was your sides speech that was in question.
 
anatta said:
finally! someone standing up to Big Tech's capricious bannings, without disclosing their process

I love this guy -but then I love anyone standing up for freedom to express political speech
Click to expand...

We need someone to stand up to publishers "capriciously" having opinions? They need to have government approval to disagree with the Republicans? And you think that is freedom of expression?

Freedom of expression is having the right to have opinions without the permission of the government. It does not matter if someone in government finds them "capricious".
 
Strictly a PR stunt by the Governor, with the Trump’s taking residence in Florida I’d expect all the Republicans in the State are going to be tripping over each other attempting to outTrump the other

Where does a Governor get the authority to regulate a private company? There’s no “freedom of speech” issue here, they are private entities, the can basically do as they want as long as it doesn’t violate a law or endanger anyone

As I said, a photo op moment for the base and Trumps
 
Flash said:
Conservatives would not favor more government regulation just because they don't like something.
Click to expand...

Flash has now entered in his nominee for the "Worst Take of 2021" award fairly early.

So...you think Conservatives don't favor more government regulation of something they don't like?

So...all the anti-abortion laws and anti-voting laws are just imaginary then?


"Big Tech" seems to be the new villain replacing the Koch Brothers, Soros, MSM, etc. We need an enemy to blame for the latest evils.
Click to expand...

So it's another anti-Semitic trope, then?

Now, why would we unify with those people?
 
suddenly just like that the democrats no longer care about the super rich getting richer.....


remember the fairness doctrine?
 
LV426 said:
Flash has now entered in his nominee for the "Worst Take of 2021" award fairly early.

So...you think Conservatives don't favor more government regulation of something they don't like?

So...all the anti-abortion laws and anti-voting laws are just imaginary then?
Click to expand...

Do you consider those laws conservative? Because a person labels themselves conservative does not mean they favor conservative policies.

If you think that is the Worst Take of 2021 just wait--- I'm sure you will soon surpass me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top