Because that’s their right, they own twitter.
True…let’s remove section 230 protections unless the companies allow for all legal speech on their platform.
No, and No.
However I was one of the very first few members on this forum who predicted Trump would win 2016. You may remember me from my thread : “ Let’s Talk about Trump “
It would be interesting to see what the platforms would look like in that case and how they would usefully function particularly at the margins.
Section 230 not only eliminates liability for content posted but also for companies policing their content “whether or not such material is constitutionally protected” provided that it is done in good faith.
It was an innovative piece of legislation for a new technology and contributed greatly to the value of the industry. In some ways similar to the innovation of the concept of the company as a legal person. So any change to section 230 should be handled carefully with a clear understanding of the ramifications and not in politically charged hearings a few days before an election.
1 Like
It actually makes sense, because protests will keep larger numbers of people off the streets, while most people will just go about their normal business around a political rally. As a hypothetical example, if there were large announced gatherings of ax murderers that would go marching down the streets for periods, I bet that would have slowed the spread even more, though you would still have had large gatherings of people (ax murderers) taking place. I’m not saying it’s definitely true, but it sounds plausible.
ATT looking to sell CNN.
2 Likes
If there’s any justice left, then CNN will die a long, agonizing death trailing its intestines while wolves tug at them with relish.
With any luck, MSNBC would be next.
3 Likes
This is the kind of news that’s killing them.
They also have huge overhead costs with “celebrity journalists” on the payroll and I’m guessing it’s not cheap to have CNN in every airport I’ve been to in the US.
1 Like
I don’t have the source handy, but I recently read that CNN pays (in the aggregate) ~$US7 million annually to US airports in return for their airing CNN gate side.
Pays.
1 Like
7 million sounds like pennies.
1 Like
It’s the direction that carries the meaning. Yeah airport real estate is super valuable, but I have to wonder who pays whom if it’s, say, HBO instead of CNN.
For example, I wonder who pays whom in Japan, where NHK is served.
In the big picture it’s not huge, but perhaps indicative of the huge costs it takes to keep them running. It doesn’t sound like CNN is very profitable, sounds like they’re bleeding cash.
People get news differently now. Small independent reporting is gaining traction. Go look at Tim Pools YouTube, people like him are growing and perhaps even more trusted than huge networks these days.
If they can sell that to their advertisers as a benefit, just seems like an associated cost. Regardless of their overall profitability which you may be right about, I’m sure they’re not losing any sleep over that 7 million.
I used to watch Tim Pool a little, but stopped specifically because he’s ridiculously biased. He seems to now be doing far more commentary/hosting than journalism.
Right, I was just pointing out that people like him are growing. Perhaps it’s a huge reason why huge media like CNN might be struggling. They weren’t struggling before so something must have changed, or many things.
My main concern is that I own shares of ATT 
to be perfectly honest. ATT has a huge debt problem, they’ve been getting killed in their entertainment division with covid preventing Hollywood from working and with their ownership of CNN adding to their debt.
1 Like
Just saying.
Pool seems almost as if he’s financially invested in a US civil war the past few months. It gets old quick imo. I still hope he outlasts CNN.
1 Like
I stopped watching CNN about 15 years ago, lol.
I hear you.
1 Like
6 Likes
There is this continuous high-pitched whine
this hearing — like other Republican-led tech hearings in the Trump era — devolved into a banal session of complaining about the alleged suppression of specific conservatives and conservative posts on social media.
These stories of alleged suppression tend to be simply anecdotal because the facts simply don’t back up sweeping assertions. We at Media Matters have done study after study after study after study showing that conservative content on Facebook receives significantly greater engagement than other content. The New York Times’ Kevin Roose has shown that the top-performing link posts on U.S. Facebook pages are dominated by conservatives like President Donald Trump, conservative podcaster and Daily Wire co-founder Ben Shapiro and Fox News contributor and conservative news aggregator Dan Bongino.
In fact, the examples that conservatives give of alleged censorship are usually just examples of individuals breaking the rules or not knowing how social media works.