High-Water Marx?: Scott Jennings Pushes Back on Progressive Corbin Trent Who Says Socialis...
Blow-By-Blow: Harry Sisson and Don Lemon Want to Go One-On-One With Male Members...
Crass Media: Minnesota Star Tribune Columnist Cheers Tim Walz for Pardoning Illegal Alien...
Accent Precedent: It Turns Out That AOC's Duplicitous Dialects Are a Die-Hard Democrat...
Celebrate! Vice President JD Vance and Second Lady Usha Welcome Baby Boy
El-Sayed’s Revealing Dodge: Tapper Presses Him on Ayatollah, He Cites Mourning in Michigan
Gone Too Soon, and Not Soon Enough to Fix It
Van Jones Thanked for Un-Defining Progressivism
NYT Left Baffled by the Radical Concept of a Married, Pregnant Working Mom...
Qatar Agents in Congress? McDonald’s Has Stricter Background Checks. Kat Cammack’s Bill Wa...
Bill Maher: 'I'm Not Living in Commie America' – Says His 2028 Vote...
Grover Norquist Uses Montana As an Example to Sell Tax Cuts
What a Loss (for Laughs): Bellows Drops Out of Maine Dem Senate Race...
Sen. Chuck Grassley Pleads on Behalf of Farmers
BACKLASH: X Takes Mark Ruffalo to Task for Shaming Elon Musk With Lame...

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