Stubborn As a Hogg: Ex-DNC Vice Chair Says Graham Platner Should Go Away...
MS NOW’s Jen Psaki Misses ‘Excellent Journalism’ From Her Tenure As Biden’s Press...
Retired Border Patrol Commander-At-Large Greg Bovino: 'Notice the Entitlement'
'I Have Somewhere to Be, Man': Enjoy This Video of an Ultra-Karen Getting...
NYT's Nicholas 'Dog-Rape' Kristof Doesn't Take Anything at Face Value
Abortion Doctor Admits Elective Late-Term Abortions Happen 'All the Time'
CNN’s Erin Burnett Looks Into 'Multiple' Sailors Trying to Go Overboard on the...
Alyssa Farah Griffin Wants Campus Protests for Afghan Girls but Skips It on...
Arrested SPLC Official Says White Supremacy Is One of the Worst Things Created...
Atlantic Contributor Suggests the Republican Equivalent of Woke 1.0
Trump Weighing Kari Lake, Scott Jennings, and Spencer Pratt As Possible Replacements for...
Adam Kinzinger Says ICE Using Non-Lethal Shock Gloves Feels a Bit Communist
Electrifying News! DHS Plans to Equip ICE Agents With Non-Lethal Shock Gloves
Transphobic ‘Comedian’ Tells NBA Stars to Chemically Transition or STFU
Scott Jennings Hilariously DROPS Abdul El-Sayed and His 'Football Challenge' With a Single...

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