These Might Have Been the Most Pathetic Parts of CNN's Chat With Natalie...
Biden-Freed Salvadoran Illegal Arrested for Murdering Mother on Quiet Fairfax County Joggi...
El-Sayed Explains His Nefarious Plan: Seize Your Private Insurance So the Govt Can...
Commie Angie Nixon Threatens to 'Whoop' Ashley Moody After Stunning FL Primary Upset...
Vindman Drops 16M and Still Gets Clowned by a Commie in Florida —...
Redsteeze Unleashes Grok to Permanently Brand Congress With the Tattoos They Deserve (It’s...
Chip Roy Sums Up CNN-Style 'Journalism' After Natalie Harp Sensationalism Backfires
The Memo (or Fatwa) Went Out: Michigan Dems Bend the Knee in Unison...
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott Has a Demand of His Own After MN AG...
Oh, Brother!: CNN’s Erin Burnett Questions Sibling of Natalie Harp to Prolong Scandal...
Don Lemon and Jemele Hill Say Stephen A. Smith Is ‘Problematic’ for Hosting...
Briahna Joy Gray and the Luigi Mangione Murder Apologists
Trump Gloats As Alexander Vindman Suffers Upset Loss to DSA Member in FL...
That's Not Funny: Amnesty International UK to Host 'Comedy' Event
AG Keith Ellison Sues Texas to Compel the Extradition of an ICE Agent...

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