Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There's a link in the article of the Bill. If congress won't act against the monopolies of big tech and their censorship, maybe this is a start.
SUBCHAPTER B. DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS Sec
.A113.051.AA PUBLIC DISCLOSURES.
(a)A social media platform shall, in accordance with this subchapter,
publicly disclose accurate information regarding its content management,data management,
and business practices, including specific information regarding how the social media
platform:
(1)AA curates and targets content to users;(2)AA places and promotes content,services,and products,including its own content,services,and products
I support this in principle but like so maky things the devil will be in the details of enforcement. If someone is advocating violence for a political reason, for example, whether the post was removed for the politics or the incitement of violence will at times be up for debate. I don't think there are many examples of social media platforms removing accounts for 100% political reasons. It is usually for trolling, inciting violence, misinformation, etc. Of course the counter to this is that these are being used as pretext. But it's just not as clear-cut as some like to claim.
The bill has some pretty onerous reporting and other requiremenets, if you care to read it: https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/87...pdf#navpanes=0. For example, the platforms need to make a live person available by phone to handle complaints. This would be great, but it also seems like that will be a pretty big expense in and of itself. And that's just an example.
I also wonder how they think they could enforce discrimination against people based on their physical location in Texas. Many companies elect not to do business in a particular state based on its regulations, etc - the state can't force a company to do business there. I am not terribly knowledgeable about computer technology but with the amount of data out there I assume these platforms can tell most of the time what state their users are in.
I also agree with the previous poster that the bill does seem to be politically targeted to avoid regulating those social media platforms favored by the Alt-Right. An amendment to the bill was proposed to decrease the number of users to trigger application of the rules but it was defeated.
The right wingers think it's okay to do so why not let the private business do what they want with regard to who can or cannot be on their forum?
Also, are you really comparing spreading lies under the guise of political opinion the same as the civil rights of a protected class of citizens. No social media site is banning people based on their race, sexual orientation, or gender. Apples to oranges there.
The left wingers think it’s ok to do so why not let private business do what they want with regard to who can or cannot bake a cake in their business?
Also, are you really comparing religious oppression under the guise of civil rights of protected class of citizens. No private business is banning people based on their race, sexual orientation, or gender. Apples to oranges here.
The left wingers think it’s ok to do so why not let private business do what they want with regard to who can or cannot bake a cake in their business?
Also, are you really comparing religious oppression under the guise of civil rights of protected class of citizens. No private business is banning people based on their race, sexual orientation, or gender. Apples to oranges here.
Firstly, I somewhat followed the "cake" controversy and agree that a religious baker should not have to create a cake that depicted an image that is contrary to their beliefs. However, I do not believe that a bakery of any type should deny the sale of general wares to any person based on their protected class. The baker agreed to sell them something else and didn't wholly turn them down for service. Supreme Court ruled in his favor so not sure what "religious oppression" you think is being advocated here. So if you are trying to get a "gotcha" on me, you've failed. I don't believe religious people should be made to design something artistically that is abhorrent to them.
Not really understanding your comparison of the two things here. No one on a social media site is being denied "service" based on their political beliefs, which by the way, is not a protected class from discrimination. They are being booted off because they are lying, inciting violence, or violating any other number of terms of service. They can whine all they want that is because they are conservative, but it's just not true. It's plain as day to anyone reading most of these accounts why they were booted off the platforms. Now the Texas GOP wants to protect the liars I guess and tell businesses how to operate. Rich.
Not really understanding your comparison of the two things here. No one on a social media site is being denied "service" based on their political beliefs, which by the way, is not a protected class from discrimination. They are being booted off because they are lying, inciting violence, or violating any other number of terms of service. They can whine all they want that is because they are conservative, but it's just not true. It's plain as day to anyone reading most of these accounts why they were booted off the platforms. Now the Texas GOP wants to protect the liars I guess and tell businesses how to operate. Rich.
I was banned from You Tube. They said I regularly and egregiously violated their terms of service. I appealed, and they repeated what they said the first time. And that's it. I have no means of finding out exactly what it is I supposedly said or did that got me booted off. You may believe me or not, but I absolutely honestly have no idea what I might have said or done that is in any way in violation of their TOS. I've posted exactly ONE video there, and I comment on something maybe once every three months or so. I never say anything insulting or rude or offensive. And yet, I'm banned. And I can't find out why.
This is why I applaud what Texas is doing. Because there's no accountability. It would be one thing if they had said "This is what you did wrong" and I could look at it and, if it did indeed violate the TOS, try and fix it. But I was never given any warning or any opportunity to address whatever it was that I supposedly did. Just bam! you're gone.
I agree with the first half of your post, the second half not so much. It is very much up to interpretation. Social Medial has already taken a stand politically, both sides incite violence, however only a certain side is protected. How is that fair?
I hear that all the time; however, I do have "left" friends that have also been booted from Facebook for similar violations such as encouragine protests, language, etc.; although politically none have been as dangerous as the Q-Anon rubbish that some are focused on. Sometimes I think one side focuses on the poor me attitude and thinks punishment is not being meted out fairly. It can't be 100% fair, but I do see it happening on both sides. As well as I also see really bad posts still on Facebook from people on the right and they are not deleted. They can't catch everything. That's life. It's a business. Don't like how they treat you, then leave and find another place. That goes for everyone. It's really hard to police social media. This site is an example. I won't go into much but some people here get booted for calling people a very simple name and others are on here day in and day out saying some really interesting things and they never seem to disappear. I can deal with it or I can choose not to participate anymore if it seems unfair.
Firstly, I somewhat followed the "cake" controversy and agree that a religious baker should not have to create a cake that depicted an image that is contrary to their beliefs. However, I do not believe that a bakery of any type should deny the sale of general wares to any person based on their protected class. The baker agreed to sell them something else and didn't wholly turn them down for service. Supreme Court ruled in his favor so not sure what "religious oppression" you think is being advocated here. So if you are trying to get a "gotcha" on me, you've failed. I don't believe religious people should be made to design something artistically that is abhorrent to them.
Not really understanding your comparison of the two things here. No one on a social media site is being denied "service" based on their political beliefs, which by the way, is not a protected class from discrimination. They are being booted off because they are lying, inciting violence, or violating any other number of terms of service. They can whine all they want that is because they are conservative, but it's just not true. It's plain as day to anyone reading most of these accounts why they were booted off the platforms. Now the Texas GOP wants to protect the liars I guess and tell businesses how to operate. Rich.
Let’s have the SCOTUS makes their decision whether social media’s have the right to silent conservative.
just like Mastercake vs gay couple had the opportunity with SCOTUS
So, who is that then? Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Google, and hopefully Amazon (Android) and Apple (iOS) through their app stores. Who else?
I don't know who else. Maybe Instagram? Not sure.
I was banned on Facebook years ago because I wouldn't give them my cell number.
A friend was banned on Facebook because he said, "Americans are numbskulls."
I want nothing to do with them anyway and never used the others.
I don't think the answer is if you don't like something you don't participate. That is why eventually, FB, Twitter will be boycotted...
Umm...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
