Time and time again, if you challenge Trump he comes after you.

Is it correct this stems from twitter adding a note to Trump's mail-in vote tweet?

It's so difficult to fact check these things. Is it being applied consistently across the board? Is there any bias in the fact checking process? What is propaganda, what are half-truths, what needs further detail, what are out-right lies? What might not be true now, but could be true in the future? What is hyperbole and exaggeration and what is purposeful misinformation? What is sarcasm and attempts at humor and what crosses the line?

I don't envy anyone trying to figure all these things out. I guess ultimately the problem with censorship is the people doing the censoring and how it all gets interpreted. Freedom of speech, just watch what you say and then you don't have freedom of speech if "we" say so.

Trump is an abuser of facts, and his tweets are disturbing - such as the various tweets re: the 2001 death of Lori Klausutis. Where is his decency that should be extended to her family? Trump has weaponized this poor wonan's death that has nothing to do with him except to distract from his own failures. His tweets about fraud of mail in ballots are lies. He tweets on an ongoing rant basis and either lies, brags about himself, or advances wild / crazy conspiracy theories.

November 2020 is an answer because Twitter will only scracth the service of dealing with him. He would seem to be out of control, but that would imply that he ever was in control.

What a maroon! Twitter should cancel or suspend his account! That'd be classic!

LOL, that would be pretty hilarious if twitter banned Trump.

Twitter is a private business that provides a communication platform that was built for middle school girls to talk about what Taylor Swift wore at the Grammys.

It can literally do whatever it wants to do to any communication or any user up to and including banning them. I can't believe that pro-business deregulation fanatics would have any issues with Twitter. I also personally can't believe adults use it at all. Trump is more like a middle school girl than an adult, so his use doesn't surprise me.

What a maroon! Twitter should cancel or suspend his account! That'd be classic!

Can you imagine!! 😛

Is it correct this stems from twitter adding a note to Trump's mail-in vote tweet?

Partly. Twitter, which is nothing more than a platform, suddenly implemented a policy where tweets w/incorrect information will be flagged according to some 3-tiered level of accuracy. No idea who thought that was a good idea or why Twitter would attempt to monitor its users' posts. I assume some sort of AI would be used to look for key words or phrases. That pissed off Trump on a personal level.

Ideologically, Trump has said his supporters feel disenfranchised from social media & states that FB, Twitter, youtube & other SM delete or restrict their posts & suspend users. Here, I think FB is the bigger target. So far, Zuckerberg has said he doesn't think FB should be the arbiter of truth of its users beyond copyright infringement/pirating. I'm w/him.

Of course, why anyone uses SM is beyond me.

What a maroon! Twitter should cancel or suspend his account! That'd be classic!

I would love to see that, you know it would be comedy gold. He would lose it completely.

If any one of us tweeted the way he does we would be booted off Twitter.

Or send him to the back of the classroom & make him wear the dunce hat.

What a maroon! Twitter should cancel or suspend his account! That'd be classic!

I would love to see that, you know it would be comedy gold. He would lose it completely.

If any one of us tweeted the way he does we would be booted off Twitter.

He would have to go to one of those other platforms used by Nazis, racists, terrorists, and others kicked off the respectable platforms for hate speech. In reality, that is really where he belongs.

What a maroon! Twitter should cancel or suspend his account! That'd be classic!

I would love to see that, you know it would be comedy gold. He would lose it completely.

If any one of us tweeted the way he does we would be booted off Twitter.

He would have to go to one of those other platforms used by Nazis, racists, terrorists, and others kicked off the respectable platforms for hate speech. In reality, that is really where he belongs.

So, it would be like a homecoming for Big Don. He'd be hanging out with the "good people" he's referred to before.

So wait...does Trump's executive order actually make it more likely he will be censored on twitter? Because now they will become responsible/liable for the content on their platform?

So in the case of the Joe Scarbough case, could there be some potential lawsuit along the lines of libel or defamation that twitter would want to get ahead of, so they could just ban a tweet of that kind of nature now? Seems like that would really piss Trump off even more, tweeting and having it taken down.

I don't do any social media (other than this), so I really don't know how twitter works other than occasionally trying to find some dumb thing Trump said on twitter via the regular internet.

I actually heard some of the comments on the radio when Trump was about to sign the EO.

Pretty crazy. He said he would consider, what word did he use, terminating twitter? He's one upping twitter before they can ban him, he wants to ban them.

So wait...does Trump's executive order actually make it more likely he will be censored on twitter? Because now they will become responsible/liable for the content on their platform?

So in the case of the Joe Scarbough case, could there be some potential lawsuit along the lines of libel or defamation that twitter would want to get ahead of, so they could just ban a tweet of that kind of nature now? Seems like that would really piss Trump off even more, tweeting and having it taken down.

I don't do any social media (other than this), so I really don't know how twitter works other than occasionally trying to find some dumb thing Trump said on twitter via the regular internet.

Trump's EO will be struck down in court, but theoretically, yes, Trump just expanded Twitter's (& other MS) liability for content - causing them to be more likely than previously to censor users. Stable genius!!!

The egregious & sad case of Trump v. Scarborough could be brought by Scarborough against Trump while he's president based on the SCOTUS ruling in Paula Jones' case v. Clinton. There are several types of defamation, but on Twitter, Trump implied & insinuated & said "others think" rather than saying anything directly about Scarborough murdering his aide. Also, Scarborough is a public figure, so the legal standard to prove defamation is higher than for ordinary citizens (assuming celebrities are magnets for all kinds of headlines). Prior to this EO, Twitter would have no liability for what its users tweet.

Twitter really is the bad guy IMO re Scarborough's deceased aide, Mrs. Klausutis. Her widower wrote a well-reasoned letter requesting Twitter to delete the tweet. Twitter said no. Mr. Klausutis might get legal representation to persuade Twitter to remove the tweet but the story is now worldwide.

There is no defamation against a deceased person. Mrs. Klausutis's widower could sue Trump for intentional infliction of emotional distress on him but he would have to prove that Trump intended at the time he tweeted to harm Mr. Klausutis. For all we know, Trump didn't know Mrs. Klausutis had surviving family. Trump's target is Scarborough; Klausutis is collateral damage.

Trump's target is Scarborough; Klausutis is collateral damage.

Yeah that is all he cares about.

Thanks for the comments on everything else.

I'm not in favor of holding places like facebook and instagram and twitter (or what else is there out there, snap chat...etc) liable for what their users post.

Somebody here mentioned twitter was made for teenagers, it probably was. I remember a time when facebook was just for college kids. People like talking about themselves and posting pictures of themselves and telling the entire world how they feel and what they ate, trying to be funny, be popular, get likes and followed.

Well dog gone it! How many times I gotta come here and state what a piece of sh!t Trump is???.............keep Yourselves safe......joe

Article: Fox News host Neil Cavuto: Trump’s "crack down on social media companies" based on "an outright lie"
Fox News host Neil Cavuto: Trump’s "crack down on social media companies" based on "an outright lie"

https://flip.it/vK7gEX

[Edited on 5/29/2020 by crazyjoe]

Well dog gone it! How many times I gotta come here and state what a piece of sh!t Trump is???.............keep Yourselves safe......joe

Article: Fox News host Neil Cavuto: Trump’s "crack down on social media companies" based on "an outright lie"
Fox News host Neil Cavuto: Trump’s "crack down on social media companies" based on "an outright lie"

https://flip.it/vK7gEX

[Edited on 5/29/2020 by crazyjoe]

Told you Neil Cavuto wasn't bad

I heard his show today (that is when Trump was talking about the EO). Neil was about floored that the President would speculate about closing down an American company. It is a more financially centered show, but with plenty of topics covering various issues in politics and society. Neil has a Saturday morning show too, maybe we'll get you to watch a little more Fox 😛

I just read this and got a kick that this guy from Fox was giving it to Trump a bit........joe

I just read this and got a kick that this guy from Fox was giving it to Trump a bit........joe

Trying to expand your horizons, maybe you can DVR the show 😉

Come on, people, we should expect better from a President.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/29/technology/trump-twitter-minneapolis-george-floyd.html

Twitter Places Warning on a Trump Tweet, Saying It Glorified Violence

The president’s tweet, which implied that protesters in Minneapolis could be shot, could not be viewed without reading a brief notice, and users were blocked from liking or replying to it.

Twitter added a warning label early Friday to a tweet from President Trump implying that protesters in Minneapolis could be shot, in a move likely to escalate tensions between Mr. Trump and his favorite social media megaphone.

The company said Mr. Trump’s post violated its rules against glorifying violence, and it prevented users from viewing the tweet without reading a brief notice, the first time it has restricted one of the president’s messages in this way. Twitter also blocked users from liking or replying to Mr. Trump’s post, though they were still allowed to retweet it if they added a comment of their own.

But Twitter did not take the tweet down, saying it was in the public’s interest that the message remain accessible.

In the tweet, posted early Friday morning, Mr. Trump called the protesters “thugs” and said he had told Minnesota’s governor that the military was “with him all the way.”

“Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts,” the president wrote. “Thank you!”

Twitter said it had decided to restrict the tweet “based on the historical context of the last line, its connection to violence, and the risk it could inspire similar actions today.”

Come on, people, we should expect better from a President.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/29/technology/trump-twitter-minneapolis-george-floyd.html

Twitter Places Warning on a Trump Tweet, Saying It Glorified Violence

The president’s tweet, which implied that protesters in Minneapolis could be shot, could not be viewed without reading a brief notice, and users were blocked from liking or replying to it.

Twitter added a warning label early Friday to a tweet from President Trump implying that protesters in Minneapolis could be shot, in a move likely to escalate tensions between Mr. Trump and his favorite social media megaphone.

The company said Mr. Trump’s post violated its rules against glorifying violence, and it prevented users from viewing the tweet without reading a brief notice, the first time it has restricted one of the president’s messages in this way. Twitter also blocked users from liking or replying to Mr. Trump’s post, though they were still allowed to retweet it if they added a comment of their own.

But Twitter did not take the tweet down, saying it was in the public’s interest that the message remain accessible.

In the tweet, posted early Friday morning, Mr. Trump called the protesters “thugs” and said he had told Minnesota’s governor that the military was “with him all the way.”

“Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts,” the president wrote. “Thank you!”

Twitter said it had decided to restrict the tweet “based on the historical context of the last line, its connection to violence, and the risk it could inspire similar actions today.”

This certainly is a way for Trump to expand his approval ratings - maybe not so much with minorities, but it should sure up Trump's racist backers.

For Big Don - Another day & another tweet. Our king of social media.

Come on, people, we should expect better from a President.

We should, but this is exactly what we've learned to expect from POTUS.

IMO, Twitter is playing a dangerous, unnecessary, & unwinnable game for no reason. Their standards are mystifying - today's tweet was labeled & certain features were blocked yet the Scarborough defamation was allowed to stand as it was. The article doesn't mention if Trump is the only user being monitored, but if he is, Twitter is discriminating.

Like it or not, Trump uses Twitter to announce policies, staffing & other actions in addition to his opinion. I don't want some AI software or a Twitter fact-checker deciding what we need to be warned about, allowed to like, & allowed to retweet w/comment. If Trump is using Twitter to replace pressers, then I want to read & share his statements w/o Twitter's comment or approval. It would be like trying to read the NYT w/annotations by the editorial board except Twitter is a neutral platform & the Times is a newspaper.

[Edited on 5/29/2020 by cyclone88]

Come on, people, we should expect better from a President.

We should, but this is exactly what we've learned to expect from POTUS.

IMO, Twitter is playing a dangerous, unnecessary, & unwinnable game for no reason. Their standards are mystifying - today's tweet was labeled & certain features were blocked yet the Scarborough defamation was allowed to stand as it was. The article doesn't mention if Trump is the only user being monitored, but if he is, Twitter is behaving indiscriminately.

Like it or not, Trump uses Twitter to announce policies, staffing & other actions in addition to his opinion. I don't want some AI software or a Twitter fact-checker deciding what we need to be warned about, allowed to like, & allowed to retweet w/comment. If Trump is using Twitter to replace pressers, then I want to read & share his statements w/o Twitter's comment or approval. It would be like trying to read the NYT w/annotations by the editorial board except Twitter is a neutral platform & the Times is a newspaper

Sure, we don't need Twitter editorializing its users in an attempt to protect its users from its users. But it is their platform, they can decide how to police it, they don't claim to be the media or a platform for completely free speech. They have banned people for hateful behavior and words before. This is the monster they have created - people can use Twitter to say whatever they want, who knew we would have a President who uses it to incite and spread misinformation that some people actually believe? Small credit for Twitter's slippery slope attempt, but I'm still more upset that a President would use threatening language towards citizens (even law-breaking ones) and spread lies. Especially since he single-handedly brought white rage down on black people when they previously attempted to peacefully protest by reigniting an old issue. This is another mess of Trump's making, his actions and words have had dire consequences.

So yes, it sucks we live in a time when an online platform feels it needs to temper the negligent words of a sitting President.

LOL, that would be pretty hilarious if twitter banned Trump.

The Saudis have a lot of stock in Twitter so it should not happen but it is also not the responsibility of Twitter or any forum to be fact checkers. It is the audience who should check it out if something seems wrongly reported. After what Mark Zuckerberg went thru with the Congressional investigation of Facebook and Cambridge Analytica he's not going to get involved putting Trump in the Facebook jail if The Donald posts there too.

Twitter provides a valuable quick info service. Maybe they could just put a label like "not verified by Twitter".

Is it correct this stems from twitter adding a note to Trump's mail-in vote tweet?

Partly. Twitter, which is nothing more than a platform, suddenly implemented a policy where tweets w/incorrect information will be flagged according to some 3-tiered level of accuracy. No idea who thought that was a good idea or why Twitter would attempt to monitor its users' posts. I assume some sort of AI would be used to look for key words or phrases. That pissed off Trump on a personal level.

Ideologically, Trump has said his supporters feel disenfranchised from social media & states that FB, Twitter, youtube & other SM delete or restrict their posts & suspend users. Here, I think FB is the bigger target. So far, Zuckerberg has said he doesn't think FB should be the arbiter of truth of its users beyond copyright infringement/pirating. I'm w/him.

Of course, why anyone uses SM is beyond me.

They started monitoring posts for promoting terrorism awhile back because different groups communicate on them, but so do other groups deemed to be extremists so who decides what constitutes these things?