Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!

Biden administration can resume contact with social-media platforms ‘until further orders’

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by okeechobee, Jul 14, 2023.

  1. okeechobee

    okeechobee GC Hall of Fame

    11,461
    1,526
    678
    Sep 11, 2022
    NEW ORLEANS -- A federal appeals court Friday temporarily paused a lower court’s order limiting executive branch officials’ communications with social media companies about controversial online posts.

    Biden administration lawyers had asked the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans to stay the preliminary injunction issued on July 4 by U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty. Doughty himself had rejected a request to put his order on hold pending appeal.

    Appeals court pauses order limiting Biden administration contact with social media companies

    We will fight for our right to interfere in our own elections and intimidate social media into censoring content we deem "harmful to the State"...
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • Come On Man Come On Man x 1
  2. BLING

    BLING GC Hall of Fame

    9,511
    970
    2,843
    Apr 16, 2007
    It was an idiotic ruling in the first place, from what I assume is a radical Trump judge.

    The mere act of a govt contacting a social media company doesn’t violate anyone’s free speech. Nor does social media blocking users violate speech, provided the companies have their own methods for managing their own business. Now if the government threatened actions or demanded censorship ala authoritarian states, that would be more problematic, but there would have to be a specific fact set showing that happened.

    The government reaching out to social media to correct bad info isn’t inherently any different from them commenting to CBS news or any other media organization to correct stories or issue public guidance. The idea the government can’t even have contact with media to correct misinformation is deranged. It’s really up to the companies as to whether they are engaged with that or not.
     
    • Agree Agree x 5
    • Creative Creative x 1
  3. okeechobee

    okeechobee GC Hall of Fame

    11,461
    1,526
    678
    Sep 11, 2022
    Which article in the Constitution says government should be an authority on what is suitable for the press?
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
  4. BLING

    BLING GC Hall of Fame

    9,511
    970
    2,843
    Apr 16, 2007
    A government by its very nature must interact with the free press. No?

    The constitution guarantees freedom of the press and freedom of speech. What the constitution doesn’t do is demand a silent government. Even in a free society, a government must be able to make its positions known. This judge went off the rails as he took a position effectively saying government cannot even interact with social media companies. It’s absurd on its face.

    What the constitution does is prevent the government from punishing people for disagreeable speech (or at least it’s supposed to… see: Disney vs. Desantis). But even there, free speech is not absolute. When a person is in the business of selling lies for $$$, that “speech” can potentially be prosecuted by the govt as fraud.
     
    Last edited: Jul 14, 2023
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
  5. OklahomaGator

    OklahomaGator Jedi Administrator Moderator VIP Member

    125,448
    164,604
    116,973
    Apr 3, 2007
    This is heading to the SCOTUS.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  6. okeechobee

    okeechobee GC Hall of Fame

    11,461
    1,526
    678
    Sep 11, 2022
    That's not what I asked. Which article in the Constitution says government should be an authority on what is suitable for the press?
     
    • Like Like x 2
  7. l_boy

    l_boy 5500

    13,228
    1,771
    3,268
    Jan 6, 2009
    So it is your assertion that the government, elected by the people, is not allowed to communicate with media companies? Do we need to cancel all press conferences a interviews with media? What about when the Trump administration routinely coordinated messaging with Fox News? Are you outraged by that too? Should it be illegal?

    The assertion is ridiculous. Now if the government is putting undue pressure on the media to say one thing or other, that is different. But these media companies were primarily trying to get some independent intelligence sourced info on international disinformation.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Funny Funny x 1
  8. okeechobee

    okeechobee GC Hall of Fame

    11,461
    1,526
    678
    Sep 11, 2022
    That's not even close to what we're talking out, but in your embodiment of absolute dishonesty, you just can't help yourself, can you? We're talking about the government throwing their weight around to harass and coerce social media companies and/or free press to change, edit and delete certain posts or stories. A police officer can't pull me over every time I pull out of my driveway without probable cause. Does that mean a police officer can never question me ever? or say hello? Of course not. But I have Constitutional rights which protect me from being harassed daily by the police with questions that invade my privacy. Likewise, government cannot abuse their power in regulating something that is not supposed to be regulated. If there is a specific underlying crime that is occurring, sure the FBI should be able to reach out to social media platforms to get their assistance in apprehending the suspect. But aside from that, no, government law enforcement doesn't have the purview in regulating social media content or journalism. They are not supposed to flex their muscles to cajole media or press to censor certain posts, stories or information, which is what is happening a lot. Both parties are guilty. It needs to stop yesterday.

    People like you are the reason we're in this situation where news channels merely serve as arms of the DNC or RNC. You cannot watch news now without knowing it's tainted by government propaganda, coercion and collusion. People like you will be the reason we'll lose our rights, because you just hand them away on a silver platter as though they are nothing burgers. Freedom of the press is so broad that the government does not prosecute a journalist if they publish classified intelligence to the public. Let that sink in for a bit before you begin foaming at the mouth again about how "ridiculous" my assertion is. So no, of course, government should not be nagging social media platforms or news organizations to run the stories they want or to remove posts or stories they don't like. You know where that stuff happens a lot? Russia. China. Yeah, not here though. Not supposed to, at least. We hope the SCOTUS will put a stop to it.
     
    • Winner Winner x 3
    • Disagree Bacon! Disagree Bacon! x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • Come On Man Come On Man x 1
  9. l_boy

    l_boy 5500

    13,228
    1,771
    3,268
    Jan 6, 2009
    Trying to find one thing in that wall of text that is even remotely true. Let me take a second look. “People like me” have hard time making sense of complete gobbledygook.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  10. okeechobee

    okeechobee GC Hall of Fame

    11,461
    1,526
    678
    Sep 11, 2022
    Typical @l_boy response when there really is no response.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  11. rivergator

    rivergator Too Hot Mod Moderator VIP Member

    36,460
    1,903
    2,258
    Apr 8, 2007
    One of you is talking about the govt simply talking to the social media companies. The other is talking about the govt dictating what is allowed on social media.
    That’s not the same thing.

    meanwhile, back off in the insults, please.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
  12. g8trjax

    g8trjax GC Hall of Fame

    5,324
    469
    293
    Jun 1, 2007
    THFSG is more than ok with censorship while it's their side doing the censoring but one can only imagine their stance if DJT was holding the reins. :emoji_joy:
     
    • Disagree Bacon! Disagree Bacon! x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  13. GatorRade

    GatorRade Rad Scientist

    8,941
    1,702
    1,478
    Apr 3, 2007
    Right here
    I think it’s very clear that both sides are ok with a lot of things if they are done by their own people. Eg our right leaning posters seem think regulating speech is quite appropriate when DeSantis does it.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  14. mrhansduck

    mrhansduck GC Hall of Fame

    5,038
    1,019
    1,788
    Nov 23, 2021
    • Winner Winner x 1
  15. homer

    homer GC Hall of Fame

    3,041
    910
    2,078
    Nov 2, 2015
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  16. l_boy

    l_boy 5500

    13,228
    1,771
    3,268
    Jan 6, 2009
    I have seen no evidence that government agencies were “harassing” social media companies
    The government doesn’t dictate what is on social media. That’s my whole point.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
  17. gatorchamps960608

    gatorchamps960608 GC Hall of Fame

    4,520
    942
    2,463
    Jul 4, 2020
    Where in The Constitution does it say the courts have the right to tell anyone who they can talk to or not?
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  18. GatorRade

    GatorRade Rad Scientist

    8,941
    1,702
    1,478
    Apr 3, 2007
    Right here
    There was that time that Psaki, I think, explained that the administration was searching social media posts and reporting ones that they thought were breaking rules. Not exactly state takeover of media, but it’s at least walking a problematic line.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. okeechobee

    okeechobee GC Hall of Fame

    11,461
    1,526
    678
    Sep 11, 2022
    It's a 'nice way' of saying the state is taking over media. And of course, they're never going to come right out and tell you "we're regulating media." They're going to frame it as "oh we're just letting the execs know certain posts are violating their TOS." Yeah..right. So on top of violating our Constitution rights, you're going to insult our intelligence too. Constitutional rights violations aside, we actually are paying government employees to scour millions of social media posts a day just to send a DM to the moderators or execs to let them know there's a rule violation? They are doing this on our dime. It's not a function of government. Which legislation did we pass which deemed this a function of government? Which article in the Constitution says government is supposed to help media regulate themselves? It doesn't exist. Not only are they violating Constitutional rights, they are doing so outside of the law and we, the taxpayers, are the ones paying for it.
     
    • Disagree Bacon! Disagree Bacon! x 3
    • Agree Agree x 1
  20. duchen

    duchen VIP Member

    15,381
    5,497
    3,208
    Nov 25, 2017
    You have it backwards. No article it amendment is violated by the government simply communicating with a social media company about its content. The government isn’t regulating content.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Disagree Bacon! Disagree Bacon! x 2