It seems to me they should be immune because they aren't speaking when they host the speech of others. They're carriers/conduits. But then they shouldn't be able to censor viewpoints by claiming a 1A right to not carry unwanted messages. As carriers, they aren't speakers.
The case SCOTUS will hear is interesting because it has to do with content recommendation algorithms. To what extent should social media companies be liable for messaging they promote by recommending it algorithmically?
To be clear, I'm not suggesting they shouldn't be able to moderate at all. Section 230 allows for moderation of the indecent/obscene or unlawful. But it shouldn't give them the ability to take down viewpoints they don't like while calling it "hate speech" or "misinformation."
The case SCOTUS will hear is interesting because it has to do with content recommendation algorithms. To what extent should social media companies be liable for messaging they promote by recommending it algorithmically?
To be clear, I'm not suggesting they shouldn't be able to moderate at all. Section 230 allows for moderation of the indecent/obscene or unlawful. But it shouldn't give them the ability to take down viewpoints they don't like while calling it "hate speech" or "misinformation."
π256π₯56
The medical community hopes to continue offering "gender-affirming care" to "children and adolescents" without any opposition by having their critics either silenced or prosecuted (or both).
While they've accused critics of spreading "disinformation" and "coordinating, provoking, and carrying out" threats, they haven't supported those claims, nor have they disputed the facts that have been reported about the procedures and treatments these hospitals offer.
Rather, they've doubled down on "gender-affirming care" for "minors and adolescents," saying they "stand with" the physicians and nurses offering it. So instead of denying what's been reported, they're admitting it's happening and saying it's good that it's happening!
The only thing they really seem to be disputing is that gender-affirming care amounts to child abuse. If you think it does β that is, if you think it's abusive to mutilate or chemically castrate minors β then you're not just wrong, you're a threat. This is as insane as it gets.
What they're calling for is a complete media blackout on this issue. They hope to make it criminal not to abuse children, but to report on that abuse. It's every bit as evil as it is insane.
https://thehill.com/changing-america/respect/equality/3672270-medical-groups-call-on-doj-to-investigate-threats-targeting-gender-affirming-care/
While they've accused critics of spreading "disinformation" and "coordinating, provoking, and carrying out" threats, they haven't supported those claims, nor have they disputed the facts that have been reported about the procedures and treatments these hospitals offer.
Rather, they've doubled down on "gender-affirming care" for "minors and adolescents," saying they "stand with" the physicians and nurses offering it. So instead of denying what's been reported, they're admitting it's happening and saying it's good that it's happening!
The only thing they really seem to be disputing is that gender-affirming care amounts to child abuse. If you think it does β that is, if you think it's abusive to mutilate or chemically castrate minors β then you're not just wrong, you're a threat. This is as insane as it gets.
What they're calling for is a complete media blackout on this issue. They hope to make it criminal not to abuse children, but to report on that abuse. It's every bit as evil as it is insane.
https://thehill.com/changing-america/respect/equality/3672270-medical-groups-call-on-doj-to-investigate-threats-targeting-gender-affirming-care/
The Hill
Medical groups call on DOJ to investigate threats targeting gender-affirming care
Story at a glance Leading medical organizations are asking the Department of Justice to investigate a string of recent online attacks against hospitals that provide gender-affirming health care to β¦
π₯196π’55π8
Libs of TikTok is suspended again, not for violating a policy, but for opposing an agenda. The medical community, the government, and big tech are all colluding with each other to silence opposition to child abuse.
We all have a solemn moral obligation to throw all the weight we have behind anyone who dares fight back.
We all have a solemn moral obligation to throw all the weight we have behind anyone who dares fight back.
π₯415π47π’6
Harmful misinformation is telling a woman she canβt be successful or find fulfillment if she keeps her baby.
π348π₯121π’25π2