Matt Taibbi releases THE TWITTER FILES. The first installment in a series. This is the greatest election interference in US history. People from Twitter and the media need to be locked up.

submitted by Chipit from threadreaderapp.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Schwarzenigga 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Yep - a nothingburger in the form of: OMG - wait until you see the Tweets Feds didn't want to be shared!! But there is a market for influence, involving numerous special interests, only one of which is a Democrat team, sometimes called, 'Biden', so that dimwits can think he's somehow mastermind of all of it.

Spreading misinformation and disinformation repeatedly effectively convinces many readers that these lies are true, or that they are not necessarily false. That's why a lot of money was invested in sharing these lies. Did political groups and Feds have a right to try to stop the spread of those lies? When there was no evidence to support those claims as factual, it was legitimate to restrict the spreading of lies, regardless of what we may learn about that information in the future.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

Did political groups and Feds have a right to try to stop the spread of those lies?

No, in America, lying is protected by the first amendment. The government has no right or obligation or ethical reason to change Twitter content. It may even be criminal to do so.

[–]Schwarzenigga 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It may even be criminal to do so.

Not in the least. One can and should actively protect themselves and others from libel, slander and defamation, and can sue those who are guilty of this abuse.

What is not protected by the 1st amendment: https://www.freedomforuminstitute.org/about/faq/which-types-of-speech-are-not-protected-by-the-first-amendment/

Libel, slander, and defamation law: the basics

[–]thoughtcriminal 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

One can and should actively protect themselves and others from libel, slander and defamation, and can sue those who are guilty of this abuse

That's not true. You can't sue for someone else being defamed. One of the criteria from your source:

  1. The statement caused you injury;

Okay, what is injury? Also from your source:

This means that the statement must have hurt the reputation of the subject of the statement

Those involved with the suppression don't have any standing to sue for defamation.

The government suppressing speech or even coercing a different entity to do so is plainly unconstitutional.

[–]Schwarzenigga 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Defamation lawsuits aren't that difficult to understand, nor are cease and desist requests. You can't pick your favorite points in the law and focus only on those, while avoiding the principle of the law. Simply look up Twitter suspensions and defamation claims &c. There are many. My many other comments here may also help.