Just WOW: Lefty Coffee Shop Owner Boots Young Pro-Lifers After Comparing Them to...
Pros. Descano Helped Illegal Islamic Extremist Murderer Get Passport — Yeah, It Gets...
WOW: The Way Jon Ossoff Is Trying to SPIN His Sleazy Natalie Harp...
Adam Carolla Blasts Chris Cuomo After Ex-CNN Host Tells Him to Stop Sharing...
Black Socialist Elijah Manley Seeks Primary Win Over Debbie Wasserman Schultz Because She’...
DNC Passes Resolution to Abolish ICE, Ensuring Dem Presidential Candidate Will Be Pro-Ille...
Pope Leo XIV Urgently Calls for the International Community to Advance the Two-State...
Messages Scrawled on Aircraft Flap by Service Members Show No Morale, Says Iranian...
Man Stumped That MAGA Supported Kyle Rittenhouse but Condemned Alex Pretti
White Folks Decide to Embrace the Nickname 'Mayonnaise Militia'
Here's What WaPo's Infallible Fact-Checker Was Saying About Eric Swalwell and Fang Fang...
Ex-Trump Lawyer Tells Mehdi Hasan He's Not Sure American Democracy Survives 2026 Midterms
Team Abdul El-Sayed Member Thinks Mike Rogers' Campaign Has the Aesthetics of a...
CNN Reports on US Navy Destroyer That Spent Four Days Without Power Last...
Abdul El-Sayed Says Not Being Able to Pronounce His Name Is Not the...

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