• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Critics slam the White House after Psaki reveals it's consulting with Facebook to 'flag misinformation'

Trump will never be president again. He is going to jail.
You know, you can't put him in jail just because the Democrats occupy the Whitehouse now. You guys have that Marxist dictator mindset. Boy, it's so apparent that you'd like nothing less than absolute power.
 
You know, you can't put him in jail just because the Democrats occupy the Whitehouse now. You guys have that Marxist dictator mindset. Boy, it's so apparent that you'd like nothing less than absolute power.
He is a criminal. And you would think as the party of law and order you republicans would want a criminal locked up. He will get his day in court. Stop making shit up.
 
He is a criminal. And you would think as the party of law and order you republicans would want a criminal locked up. He will get his day in court. Stop making shit up.
Jeez, if you think Trump is a criminal, I'd imagine Biden would be headed for the electric chair for his crimes!
That last part is funny, were you want me to "stop making shit up", after you completely make up stuff about Trump being a criminal. Did you miss 5 years of Democrats investigating and finding absolutely NOTHING???
 
And what is the duty of the Executive Branch? To enforce laws. What is the criminal penalty for an automaker producing a car that doesn't have seat belts? There is none. The penalty would be the inability to sell the car in America. It's almost like you have no idea how our government works...
The regulatory environment is such that agencies promulgate and change their own regulations all the time and act to enforce or protect those regulations. Section 230 is a legal sword of Damocles hanging over social media and they know it.

I'm not even going to pretend like your analogy made a damn bit of sense, everyone knows it didn't.
 
Perhaps I can help. There are three co-equal branches of government in the United States. There's the Legislative branch is made up of Congress (the House of Representatives and the Senate). Some primary responsibilities of this branch is to creates laws and the national budget as well as oversight of the executive branch. This leads us to the Executive branch which is led by the President who is elected every four years and it is the President's job to appoint advisors and cabinet members to help them run the government agencies that carry out the laws passed by Congress. And finally we have the Judicial branch which consists of the Supreme Court and lower federal courts. It's their responsibility to make sure the laws are constitutional and handles any legal disputes over the laws and their execution.

Regulations can be used to describe facets of law or policies created by authoritative agents. When someone cites a regulation it is typically used to refer to a piece of a law or an enforcement policy of an agency. When someone cites a specific regulation as defined by law they are often referring to the law itself as well as the means by which the executive branch enforces said regulation. These are some really good resources with quick and easily digestible information if you'd like to learn more.


Mostly correct. Regulations are created only by the Executive Branch. Laws are created only by the Legislative Branch. The Judicial Branch can interpret the constitutionality of the regulation or the law that is being used to enforce it (if there is one). What people talk about when talking about regulations may be the result of them not knowing how the government works (see post above)
 
The regulatory environment is such that agencies promulgate and change their own regulations all the time and act to enforce or protect those regulations. Section 230 is a legal sword of Damocles hanging over social media and they know it.

I'm not even going to pretend like your analogy made a damn bit of sense, everyone knows it didn't.
Fundamental misunderstanding of regulatory process noted.
 
Borderline retarded understanding of regulatory process noted.
When you find the part about "...agencies promulgate and change their own regulations all the time..." the process to implement this let me know.
 
Jeez, if you think Trump is a criminal, I'd imagine Biden would be headed for the electric chair for his crimes!
That last part is funny, were you want me to "stop making shit up", after you completely make up stuff about Trump being a criminal. Did you miss 5 years of Democrats investigating and finding absolutely NOTHING???
Tax evasion is one of his many crimes.
 
When you find the part about "...agencies promulgate and change their own regulations all the time..." the process to implement this let me know.
Ya know, I don't have time to play professor for you when you don't have the intellectual curiosity to go digging before making your assertion.


knock yourself out.
 
Ya know, I don't have time to play professor for you when you don't have the intellectual curiosity to go digging before making your assertion.


knock yourself out.
Cool, it's clear you have no backing to your claim.
 
Cool, it's clear you have no backing to your claim.
Oh, I have it.


Overt pressure for social media to do whatever government asks because they have already started to look at reforming section 230.
 
Oh, I have it.


Overt pressure for social media to do whatever government asks because they have already started to look at reforming section 230.
 
when the federal government demands facebook censor people, it is a freedom of speech issue.

people are free to do what they like. the government should try convincing more than strong arming and squashing freedom of speech.

No court would agree with you.

Sorry, FB is a private concern, protected from liability for what it’s customers say.
 
Oh, I have it.


Overt pressure for social media to do whatever government asks because they have already started to look at reforming section 230.

Yeah, eight months ago Trump was bellowing that he was being “silenced”. They were also outraged that anyone would try and regulate or prohibit FB, or any other social media organization from allowing political operatives and con men to peddle divisiveness, lies, Russian propoganda.

Now, the Biden Administration is still concerned over the lies and quackery that is still being peddled on these platforms.

And officials in the US government are not alone. As social media agitprop is becoming more and more common.

When a social media platform can act as agent to bringing down a sitting government, the integrity of any national government becomes at stake (Jan 6th should serve as the obvious example)

And the only solution is broad international regulation. Nobody’s saying that out loud yet. But it’s inevitable.
 
No court would agree with you.

Sorry, FB is a private concern, protected from liability for what it’s customers say.

my guess is we are going to find out what the courts agree with or not on this issue. I think you are wrong.
 
Yeah, eight months ago Trump was bellowing that he was being “silenced”. They were also outraged that anyone would try and regulate or prohibit FB, or any other social media organization from allowing political operatives and con men to peddle divisiveness, lies, Russian propoganda.

Now, the Biden Administration is still concerned over the lies and quackery that is still being peddled on these platforms.

And officials in the US government are not alone. As social media agitprop is becoming more and more common.

When a social media platform can act as agent to bringing down a sitting government, the integrity of any national government becomes at stake (Jan 6th should serve as the obvious example)

And the only solution is broad international regulation. Nobody’s saying that out loud yet. But it’s inevitable.
Lets try this again. Government is restricted from acting to silence or even chill free speech. They can enact their own vast resources to combat speech they deem bad, but they still shouldn't violate rights. If Facebook wants to act on its own, that is all well and good, they can do so. Government cannot.
 
Back
Top Bottom