Anonymous asked in Politics & GovernmentPolitics · 2 months ago

Social media giants have edited content which means they're not protected by section 230. Why should they have protections reserved to...?

...platforms when they've moved on and no longer fit the definition of a platform? 



And why should we give them protections not granted by the Constitution if they're using it to usurp the very power (free speech) those protections was intended to ensure?

Update 2:

Gungie 2: Spot on.

3 Answers

  • Anonymous
    2 months ago

    Free Speech is not guaranteed by the Constitution with regard to private companies. 

    You have been told this again and again and you refuse to learn. 

    Or, am I giving you too much credit, and is it impossible for you to learn?

  • ?
    Lv 4
    2 months ago

    So, your god is going to veto our defense bill if a bill to protect minors from accessing harmful content is not done away with. @Gungie and QAnonymous: Facebook and Twitter allows free speech. They, as companies, also have a right to call out posts as lies. 

  • 2 months ago

    Someone in DC best get off their a$ses and remove 230 protections from Facebook & Twitter so the nation won't have to deal with their bias political protection for the left?

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.