The Intercept: 30-Year Sentence for ‘Transporting Zines’ Is 5-Alarm Fire for Free Speech
Socialist Sickness: Bill Maher Says DSA Candidate Is ‘Patient Zero’ for Woke Mind...
Imagine Being Amy Coney Barrett and Telling Your Haitian Children You ‘Voted’ to...
Why Fleeing to Russia for 'Traditional Values' Is a Mistake
Sharpton Tries to Script a Softball Apology for Mamdani’s Socialist Candidate — She...
CNN's Kaitlan Collins Pushes Back on Trump Rhetoric, Says Democratic Socialism Is Not...
The ‘Hole’ Story: Conan O’Brien and Anderson Cooper Once Said Don’t Talk ‘Sh**’...
School Counselor Promotes Kids' Book About Finding a 'Chosen' Family Accepting of Their...
'Banned' German Movie Inspired by Sexual Assaults by Migrants Posted in Full to...
'Ugh, Stop Making Me Feel Sorry for This Guy': San Francisco Radicals Turn...
TX Dems Drop a Campaign Banger: 'We're All Trans, Gay, Vegan ... and...
Gavin Newsom Assures Us He’ll Be Taxing Trillionaires After Being Trolled by Elon...
'China Wants to Interface with the DSA' — Mamdani’s Socialists Can't Wait to...
School Board Clerk: Make White Christian Cemeteries Into Dog Parks So They Can...
Mary Katharine Ham Asks for Help Translating AOC’s Word Salad

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