Ilhan Omar Claims US 'Loves' Striking Muslims During Ramadan—Gets Fact-Checked Into Oblivi...
Nice Business You've Got There... Be a Shame If Democrats 'Broke It Up'...
From NPR's Own Mouths (and Blood Tests): Extremely Low Testosterone – No Wonder...
'Queen' of Bobsled Kaillie Humphries Crowns Trump Support: Defends Women's Sports and Shut...
We Owe Charlie Kirk Better: Honoring His Legacy Instead of Betraying It
Mexican Cartels Terrified of Trump: On-the-Ground Reality in Mexico Shows Panic Overblown,...
Merger Madness: Brian Stelter Laughably Describes CNN As ‘Balanced and Fact-Based’ News Ne...
Hey Look! That Thing Dems Say Never Happens (Voter Fraud) Happened AGAIN Multiple...
Peddling ‘Pedo’: Rachel Maddow and Other Media Hacks Toss Their So-Called Principles to...
Republican Senators Slow Walking the SAVE Act Get a Rude Awakening
Meteorologist Rains on Al Gore's 'Inconvenient Truth' Anniversary Parade With Some Inconve...
Bill Clinton's Opening Statement at the Epstein Deposition Sure Brings Back Some Memories
'Legit Funny'! Jim Acosta Says Free Speech Is at Risk (and Tries to...
Hillary Clinton Explains Why Ghislaine Maxwell Was at Her Daughter's Wedding (Then Avoids...
Rep Plays 'Didn't Know About That' Card When Pinned Down About Epstein Files...

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