U.S. is barred from combating disinformation on social media. Here's what it means

submitted by YoMamma from npr.org

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted]  (12 children)

[deleted]

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

    This decision will also prevent a future GOP government from censoring opinions that they despise. Speech is good. Debate is good.

    [–][deleted]  (10 children)

    [deleted]

      [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

      how is it not the issue? you are reading into the decision and making it about wild conspiracy theories of GOP domination. it is absolutely about the 1st amendment.

      [–][deleted]  (8 children)

      [deleted]

        [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

        Every time you say 'simply' or 'obviously', it means that your argument is trash.

        "Free speech" is mentioned 14 times in the injunction, and "first ammendment" is mentioned 3 times. Therefore the injunction is about free speech.

        [–][deleted]  (6 children)

        [deleted]

          [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

          now you're moving the goal posts old man. fraud applies to commercial speech, as you pointed out earlier.

          [–][deleted]  (4 children)

          [deleted]

            [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

            Did you know that I'm also pro corporate free speech? Citizens United was a great ruling.