Blonde Rage: Sportswriter Jemele Hill Blasts Podcast Viewer for Asking About Yellow Dye...
Police Track Stolen Republican Campaign Signs to Home of Retired Professor and Pastor...
Tinseltown Talarico: The Rotten ‘Grass Roots’ of Texas Dem’s Senate Campaign Stretch to...
Sen. Mike Lee Says It's Time to Impeach Activist Judge Who Keeps Blocking...
Thuggish 'Far-Right' Brits Block Buses Loaded With 'Asylum-Seekers' As Another Boatload Ar...
Gavin Newsom in SC: Don’t Dump the Socialists, Get Chummy With the Commies
Self-Deportation With Benefits: Dem Operative Offered Remote Job Running U.S. Elections Ov...
USA TODAY Network Does the Meme: 25 Years After 9/11, Muslims Fear New...
Rolling Stone: The Next President Must Vow to Restore the White House to...
‘Compassionate Caregiver’ in Florida Faces Firestorm for Gloating Over Charlie Kirk’s Assa...
CBS News: Did Two Million Germans Just Vote to Put Neo-Nazis in Power?
Marriage, Motherhood, and a Voucher From Day One
Jamie Raskin Says ‘Nobody Supports Hamas’ After Being Shown a Clip of Hasan...
Gee, Why Did Ilhan Omar Turn Off the Replies for This Labor Day...
Ted Lieu Says the Quiet Part Out Loud About What Must Be 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