3 years ago, when a domestic abuser blogging for @HuffPost FALSELY accused me of sexual assault—w/ no editorial oversight—my life/career was upended.
Yet, HuffPost was legally shielded by Sec. 230 bc it was a blogger—not a staff employee. THREAD...https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1313511340124917760?s=20 …
-
-
There are good parts of Section 230...but the part that shields an outlet like
@HuffPo from liability if something defamatory/libelous is printed as a STORY on THEIR PLATFORM-simply bc an EMPLOYEE didn't do it but a third-party blogger instead. That is ABSURD. -
Outlets like
@HuffPo have a responsibility to VET what's published on THEIR platform-whether on their front page or on their blog. Why? Because to the public, if it's printed under HuffPo, it's a reputable news story...even if the author is an unvetted domestic abuser - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.