The law (CDA section 230) says they absolutely can have it both ways -- the black-letter text and the surrounding case law says an interactive computer service can moderate content provided by others, and also not be treated as a publisher.
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The passage of Sec. 230 had nothing to do with “platforms” being “neutral.” Stop spreading the “neutrality” and “platform v. publisher” Section 230 myths.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Anytime PragerU says something I automatically believe the opposite. It is nothing but right wing propaganda. They have been caught lying so many times that at a certain point we must assume it is intentional.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Looks like Google kept her out of the “loop”.
-
I mind the question she was asked: "Does Google 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘳 itself to be a neutral public forum?" Her answer, whether answering for herself individually or claiming it by representation was, "Yes." Considering Google to be a neutral public forum does not define it as such.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Regardless of what Prager says, or wishes to decipher what Google claims or Prager's gotcha claim, the fact remains: Google is the gatekeeper of their domain.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Conservatives have really started running with the victim politics baton.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I'll take that as a no!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
LoL, neutral huh?! Ha!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This is nonsense.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.