Bloodsucker Proxy: Communist Asks for a DSA Mascot, Gets a Whole Lot More
Ron DeSantis Shares Headline That Sums Up Healthcare in 2026
Sen. Chuck Grassley Argues for a Diesel Embargo
Ed Sheeran Should Have Listened to Dana Loesch — NEVER Bend the Knee...
Jonathan Karl Remembers the First Amendment
Take the L, Barack: You Pulled the SAME 'Ban the Media' Stunt You're...
Dana Bash Tries Shaming Mike Walz for Defending Trump's CNN Ban and WOW,...
HOOBOY: Amy Klobuchar Caught Using the Same Pic Trying to Connect With Normies...
Look Out Elizabeth Warren, Peggy Flanagan Is Coming for YOUR Grift (and She's...
Troy Jackson Dodging This Particular Question Is Just DAMNING on So Many Levels...
TWOCH Full VOD Episode 09192026
WATCH: Student BIZARRELY Flips Out After Black Pro-Lifer Hits Back on Her ‘Kirk...
Guess Who Came to Dinner? Abdul El-Sayed's 'Lesbian Rosh Hashanah' Stunt BACKFIRES Spectac...
The Hack Is Back: Podcaster Jim Acosta Abandons Pool Duty to Encourage ‘Journo’...
Judge Says the Dumbest Thing Possible When SENTENCING a Hero Who Stopped a...

Families of Orlando nightclub terror attack victims sue social media outlets for providing support to ISIS

The families of three men shot by Omar Mateen during his terror attack on the Orlando nightclub Pulse in June have filed a lawsuit against Twitter, Facebook, and Google for helping radicalize Mateen and for providing material support.

Advertisement

The suit alleges the three companies provided the terrorist group ISIS with the means “to spread extremist propaganda, raise funds, and attract new recruits.”

https://twitter.com/ghostofanation/status/810976572261814272

Fox News reports:

At the heart of the lawsuit is the interpretation of a provision tucked deep inside the Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996 called Section 230.

The language of Section 230 states that “No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.” In layman’s terms, this basically means that sites like Facebook or YouTube are not liable for what their users post on their sites.

As tempting as it is to sympathize with the friends and families of those killed in the mass shooting, a lawsuit against social media providers because of a terrorist’s actions is an awfully slippery slope.

Advertisement

Social media companies have enough trouble policing themselves; YouTube, for example, already thinks Dennis Prager’s PragerU videos and Christina H. Sommers’ Factual Feminist videos are “inappropriate.” Imagine them being handed the standing excuse that they could be sued for, say, giving conservatives a platform to spread their “hate speech” or promote firearms ownership.

https://twitter.com/brentsmrs/status/810977196395393024

https://twitter.com/FigmentsB/status/810980280508895232

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement