What ruling was that? I'm curious to look at the case.We will have to see how this plays out. Texas won a judgement that they can force free speech on private companies of a large enough size.
What ruling was that? I'm curious to look at the case.We will have to see how this plays out. Texas won a judgement that they can force free speech on private companies of a large enough size.
In any event I’m glad to see that an alternative view to dear leader is being challenged. That they responded by pulling their statement is even better."Twitter" (the entity/company) had nothing directly to do with the "fact check" in this case. It was Twitter's crowd-sourced fact-checking feature called Birdwatch. Actual users created the fact-check comments, and other users voted the fact-check comments up/down.
I dare you to post about the forbidden topic here and see if you get “discriminated “ against.Sorry but if a private business can't discriminate on the basis of sex or race, they can't discriminate on political affiliation. Can't have it both ways.
I first heard of it here.What ruling was that? I'm curious to look at the case.
You'll have to enlighten me, I don't know the topic to which you're referring?I dare you to post about the forbidden topic here and see if you get “discriminated “ against.
Thanks!I first heard of it here.
Texas social media “censorship” law goes into effect after federal court lifts block
The ruling Friday from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals likely means the case, which could have wide implications for online speech, will go before the U.S. Supreme Court again.www.texastribune.org
Court rules in favor of Texas law on social media regulation
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — A federal appeals court on Sept. 16 ruled in favor of a Texas law targeting major social media companies like Facebook and Twitter in a victory for Republicans who accuse the platforms of censoring conservative speech.www.mtsu.edu
I read when it happened that the tweets were archived, which therefor followed the guidelines.Watchdog claims White House violated ethics rules by deleting tweet
A rightwing pressure group on Friday accused the White House of breaching public records laws by deleting a tweet this week, saying it undermined freedom of information requests.www.dailymail.co.uk
White House VIOLATED ethics guidelines by deleting fat-checked tweet saying Biden had given American seniors the biggest boost in social security, watchdog group claims
I believe the advocacy for insurrection/civil war. (Not Jan6 or the war of northern aggression.)You'll have to enlighten me, I don't know the topic to which you're referring?
Well then, I'm even more confused.I believe the advocacy for insurrection/civil war. (Not Jan6 or the war of northern aggression.)
You cant advocate to use the 4th box of liberty.Well then, I'm even more confused.
I understand the rule, just not how it entered the discussion.You cant advocate to use the 4th box of liberty.
And if you still dont understand, google it.
I posted this somewhere earlier.MO, LA Attorneys General Grill Fauci Over Collusion With Big Tech
Fauci testified over his alleged role in colluding with Big Tech to squash Covid-related posts the administration labeled 'misinformation.'thefederalist.com