TRUMP DECLARES WAR ON SOCIAL MEDIA
TWITTER’S MOVE OF ATTACHING FACT-CHECKING NOTICES TO TWO OF US PRESIDENT’S TWEETS HAS RANKLED THE WHITE HOUSE LIKE NEVER BEFORE
US President signed an executive order yesterday to limit liability protection for social media giants, two days after lashing out at Twitter for applying fact checks to two of his tweets. |
US President Donald Trump yesterday signed an executive order limiting liability protections social media companies enjoy after Twitter began selective fact checks of his posts on the platform. “We’re fed up with it,” Trump said, claiming the order would uphold freedom of speech.
How will the order help US administration deal with social media platforms?
It directs executive branch agencies to ask independent rule-making agencies including the Federal Communications Commission and the Federal Trade Commission to study whether they can place new regulations on the companies — though experts express doubts much can be done without an act of Congress.
Such an order would make it easier for federal regulators to argue that companies like Facebook, Google, YouTube and Twitter are suppressing free speech when they move to suspend users or delete posts, among other examples.
But Is it lawful?
The move is almost certain to face a court challenge. Twitter this week attached fact-checking notices to two of the president’s tweets after he made false claims about voter fraud, and Trump and his supporters have long accused social media companies of silencing conservative voices.
Will the order diminish online companies’ immunity from liability?
Under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, online companies have broad immunity from liability for content created by their users.
But the draft of the executive order, which refers to what it calls “selective censoring,” would allow the Commerce Department to try to refocus how broadly Section 230 is applied and to let the Federal Trade Commission bulk up a tool for reporting online bias.
Although the law does not provide social media companies blanket protection — for instance, the companies must still comply with copyright law and remove pirated materials posted by users — it does shield them from some responsibility for their users’ posts.
Will the move stifle online discussions?
Along with the First Amendment, Section 230 has helped social media companies flourish. They can set their own lax or strict rules for content on their platforms, and they can moderate as they see fit. Defenders of the law, including technology companies, have argued that any move to repeal or alter it would cripple online discussion.
We will strongly regulate, or close them [Twitter] down, before we can ever allow this to happen.”
Donald Trump | US President
Why are conservatives against social media?
For long conservatives have claimed that social media companies are biased against them and over moderate their political views. In fact, Republican lawmakers have increasingly pushed to modify the statute.
Senators Marco Rubio of Florida and Josh Hawley of Missouri also chimed in this week after Twitter applied its new fact-checking standard to the president. Both lawmakers have been critics of the protections that technology companies enjoy under Section 2 30, and they renewed their calls to alter it.
Why is Trump angry with Twitter?
The president has long favoured Twitter as a means to reach his supporters, posting personal attacks and previewing policy. This week, Trump repeatedly spread a debunked conspiracy theory about MSNBC host Joe Scarborough and the death of a woman who worked for him in his congressional office years ago. The woman’s widower has pleaded with Trump to stop. The president ignored the widower’s request and denounced Twitter, claiming in a tweet that the social media company was trying to tamper with the November presidential election.
On Wednesday, he continued to criticise the company, accusing it of stifling conservative views. “We will strongly regulate, or close them down, before we can ever allow this to happen,” Trump tweeted.
What’s the stand of YouTube and Facebook?
A spokesperson for YouTube declined to comment on the
I just believe strongly that Facebook shouldn’t be the arbiter of truth of everything that people say online.”
Mark Zuckerberg | CEO, Facebook
Fact check: there is someone ultimately accountable for our actions as a company, and that’s me.”
Jack Dorsey | CEO, Twitter
executive order. Representatives for Facebook did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
But Mark Zuckerberg, the company’s chief executive, appeared to be pre-emptively trying to soften any blowback from the White House. In a taped television interview he cast aspersions on Twitter’s willingness to fact check Trump on its platform in real time. “I just believe strongly that Facebook shouldn’t be the arbiter of truth of everything that people say online,” Zuckerberg said. “Private companies probably shouldn’t be, especially these platform companies, shouldn’t be in the position of doing that.”
Can the order overturn existing legal framework on technology firms?
Courts have often ruled in favour of technology companies, upholding their immunity. It is not clear that the executive order would alter judges’ views on the law. “It’s unclear what to make of this because to a certain extent, you can’t just issue an executive order and overturn on a whim 25 years of judicial precedent about how a law is interpreted,” said Kate Klonick, an assistant law professor at St. John’s University.