Marjorie Taylor Greene's personal Twitter account permanently suspended over COVID-19 ‘misinformation’
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ma...nently-suspended-covid-19-misinformationExplore the Fox News apps that are right for you at
http://www.foxnews.com/apps-products/index.html.
Hardly surprising. She's a little bit of a nut job.
They probably did her a favor.
Over COVID-19 ‘misinformation’
Twitter is The Enemy. Of course one of just many Commie ran Social Media that needs to go.
They may be the "enemy" but they don't force anyone to use it or read it.
They may be the "enemy" but they don't force anyone to use it or read it.
I personally dont use it, but many of the sites we all use regularly link twitter articles.
when they can guarantee everything you read on twitter is the truth I will be ok with suspending things that arent
It’s still big brother stifling free speech. That’s never a good thing.
Some homo with purple hair and ear gauges sitting in a cubicle making $12 an hour cut her off.
Same thing happened to me on Youtube. I’d like to choke the eyeballs out of the someone that cut my channel off
It’s still big brother stifling free speech. That’s never a good thing.
Yep.
Over COVID-19 ‘misinformation’
Twitter is The Enemy. Of course one of just many Commie ran Social Media that needs to go.
You're very biased!
Oops!
She must have told the truth...
I hope Trump can get his social media platforms off of the ground. They will dominate, just like FOX did when they launched. The liberal tantrumps (I made a typo on that word but decided to let it stand) will be epic!
It’s still big brother stifling free speech. That’s never a good thing.
1. Twitter is a private organization so pretty much their sandbox, their rules.
2. Anyone who reads something on Twitter (or any media platform) and belives it without verifying it, is a moron.
3. As a Libertian, I do not believe it is the role of the government to protect morons.
In regards to the government interfering with the First Amendment, there is far too much of that going on. This Administration is engaged in a systematic destruction of the First Amendment and so far, they are getting away with it.
Some homo with purple hair and ear gauges sitting in a cubicle making $12 an hour cut her off.
Same thing happened to me on Youtube. I’d like to choke the eyeballs out of the someone that cut my channel off
Dang it! Now how the heck are we going to find out how things really were at Johns-Manville in the pre-respirator days?
Meanwhile, the taliban (tollybon for dopey Joey) has unfettered access.
Some homo with purple hair and ear gauges sitting in a cubicle making $12 an hour cut her off.
Same thing happened to me on Youtube. I’d like to choke the eyeballs out of the someone that cut my channel off
Dang it! Now how the heck are we going to find out how things really were at Johns-Manville in the pre-respirator days?
I can always make a sock puppet. Maybe i already have. Or 3
Burner phone, proxy server, fresh gmail...back in business
What would the world ever do without their Twitter, FB, and Tik-Toc?
🤷🏽♀️🤦♀️🦫
If conservative politicians simply vacated twitter/facebook etc - it would collapse within itself as an echo chamber.
Zero minds are being changed or educated by being there.
None of the conservative pols are on DU or Huffpo either and no one bats an eye.
War is coming. Know who and where the enemy is in your backyard.
Twitter Suspends Popular Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene – After She Asked AOC to Apologize for Smearing Governor Ron DeSantis
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...pologize-smearing-governor-ron-desantis/
Its a Badge of Honor to get kicked off FaceFuck,Titter or any of the other Moronic Social media spots.
Kingston has a plan to fight epistemological and moral relativism. I'm assuming it will be announced after the Superbowl.
If conservative politicians simply vacated twitter/facebook etc - it would collapse within itself as an echo chamber.
This is a political echo chamber when we discuss politics. It doesn't seem to stifle political topics.
That will teach her for going against "groupthink".....She should consider that a badge of honor.
They may be the "enemy" but they don't force anyone to use it or read it.
That goes for posts the Snowflakes don't agree with.....and they definitely are the enemy.....without quotation marks.
Twitter suspended Dr Malones account too.
It’s still big brother stifling free speech. That’s never a good thing.
That.
that is one fugly woman. and she has flintstone feet.
If conservative politicians simply vacated twitter/facebook etc - it would collapse within itself as an echo chamber.
This is a political echo chamber when we discuss politics. It doesn't seem to stifle political topics.
I guess you haven’t noticed all the communist and cuck posters here ? None are censored. The lack of censorship is why I’m here. I loath the trolls as much as anyone but I don’t want them banned.
It’s still big brother stifling free speech. That’s never a good thing.
1. Twitter is a private organization so pretty much their sandbox, their rules.
2. Anyone who reads something on Twitter (or any media platform) and belives it without verifying it, is a moron.
3. As a Libertian, I do not believe it is the role of the government to protect morons.
In regards to the government interfering with the First Amendment, there is far too much of that going on. This Administration is engaged in a systematic destruction of the First Amendment and so far, they are getting away with it.
They’re are government townships and other government agencies throughout the country that use FB and to a lesser degree Twitter to disseminate public information. FB and Twitter are public utilities no different from your TV, radio, or telephone and should be treated as such. It’s been pointed out on here over and over again that Twitter and FB receive special government protections as a “platform” rather than being a “publisher” of news. The amount of arrogance and evil it takes to cut off US citizens from hearing the opinions of their elected officials is absolutely disgusting.
Trump in part won his first election due to being able to bypass msm and connect directly with voters via Twitter. Which is why they banned him and just banned Greene. When a news media has that much influence AND is receiving special privileges from the government. That’s a public interest utility.
It’s still big brother stifling free speech. That’s never a good thing.
1. Twitter is a private organization so pretty much their sandbox, their rules.
2. Anyone who reads something on Twitter (or any media platform) and belives it without verifying it, is a moron.
3. As a Libertian, I do not believe it is the role of the government to protect morons.
In regards to the government interfering with the First Amendment, there is far too much of that going on. This Administration is engaged in a systematic destruction of the First Amendment and so far, they are getting away with it.
You sound young, idealistic and stupid. Your proclamation reaks of the same smug superiority that I endure from liberals. Since twitter has a big footprint and conservatives are being silenced via collusion of FB, TWITTER, GOOGLE, AMAZON, APPLE ETC and given 230 protection we should be okay with it? At some level it is a numbers game and those "morons" will become voters and dangerous mobs.
Pick a side and offer no quarter.
In the history of mankind, the people trying to stifle speech have never been the "good guys."
Not once. Ever.
Including now.
For those who are pissing and moaning about Twitter, I would like to know who you want to have the power to control the national narrative? How can anyone be comfortable with an all powerful agency determining what we can and cannot be told. So many of you are already screaming about government mandates and overreach so now you want the same government to intervene in the Free Market to ensue your views are "fairly" represented.
The fact is, these are private corporations free to make the rules as they see fit. If you don't like it, don't use it or listen to it. Sooner or later, Twitter and the rest will lose their followers just like CNN and MSNBC have. If the liberal minority wants to support it, who cares?
Sorry I don't give a flip what a Woke private corporation does. I certainly will not support it. But I DO care about what our government does and I sure as hell do not want to empower them any more than they are today.
There is a reason why BOTH parties are pushing for government control over social media - They want to control the narrative. Thanks but no thanks. I don't believe in a benevolent, fair government.
Greene is getting a good deal of publicity over this. Hopefully she rakes in a pile of cash and uses her ban to further her cause.
The fact is, these are private corporations free to make the rules as they see fit. If you don't like it, don't use it or listen to it. Sooner or later, Twitter and the rest will lose their followers just like CNN and MSNBC have. If the liberal minority wants to support it, who cares?
Right, because when I turn on a TV MSM news channel it’s full of conservative and constitutional minded news choices. The one MSM choice even remotely close to honest or constitutionally minded FOX is really nothing but controlled opposition or RINO at best. Every other one is hard communist left. Alternatives to Google? YouTube? There’s no good answer to MSM but there’s a simple open platform fix to several of the newer ones. Make them be a modern day soapbox free for all to get on and speak what they want right wrong or indifferent.
Should AT&T back in the day as the only phone provider have been able to cancel any conservative voice that it wished? Should Version and AT&T be able to today? It’s a private company..
Again as has been discussed over and over. Twitter and FB are granted special status as platforms rather than publishers. They are not acting as platforms, they’re acting as publishers brainwashing much of the public and shaping elections and likely with some level of collusion between the various Big Tech providers.
The left has been writhing the biggest war the only one that matters longterm, the cultural war for decades because they’ve taken over and monopolized MSM and without other alternatives.
Some homo with purple hair and ear gauges sitting in a cubicle making $12 an hour cut her off.
Same thing happened to me on Youtube. I’d like to choke the eyeballs out of the someone that cut my channel off
They make a lot more than that in Silicon Valley. Like maybe ten times more.
For those who are pissing and moaning about Twitter, I would like to know who you want to have the power to control the national narrative? How can anyone be comfortable with an all powerful agency determining what we can and cannot be told. So many of you are already screaming about government mandates and overreach so now you want the same government to intervene in the Free Market to ensue your views are "fairly" represented.
The fact is, these are private corporations free to make the rules as they see fit. If you don't like it, don't use it or listen to it. Sooner or later, Twitter and the rest will lose their followers just like CNN and MSNBC have. If the liberal minority wants to support it, who cares?
Sorry I don't give a flip what a Woke private corporation does. I certainly will not support it. But I DO care about what our government does and I sure as hell do not want to empower them any more than they are today.
There is a reason why BOTH parties are pushing for government control over social media - They want to control the narrative. Thanks but no thanks. I don't believe in a benevolent, fair government.
saw where Rogan opened up an account on Gettr as a result of this
the best way to change twitter is to support their competition, not support government interference.
Strswilson,
Ok better point this time and I apologize for making it personal.
Your reasoning is sound but you are entirely missing the main point.
The 230 protection which is government provided immunity is in fact government putting their fingers on the scale. Most often it seems to go againts republicans and conservatives. So freezing someone out of their private platform is legal. If their terms are similar to an at will relationship that is also perfectly legal and should continue to be so. Publicly saying someone is providing false information when it is not false is defamation and slander. Further if people act on this there is liabilty.
If for example they continue to publish(since they exert editorial control they are in fact publishers) then they should have liability. So lets say there is a certain injection advertised as a vaccine that is realy a relatively weak prophylactic that ruins peoples immune systems and causes circulatory and cardio vascular problems in millions of americans. Further twitter has volumes of how good it is and why all should get it including the children. They also promote lockdowns and firing perfectly good workers who chose not to be injected. Their size and influence is real( I agree they may be morons but it is you and I that end up dealing with morons). Now lets say their platform does not contain a single cautionary tale about why someone should take a pause before forcing the injection or firing someone.
Well in the future they should be open to getting their asses sued off in massive class action for promoting lies. Supressing truth is still legal if they wish. So you and I agree we do not trust government. First amendment applies. However you can't have it both ways. The current state of affairs with 230 protections and big monopolistic companies deplatforming individuals and pulling contracted hosting and cloud server support is wrong and a proper DOJ would do something about it.
All that said we are living in times of a failing state and culture so it may not matter much in a few more years.
It's all part of the combined attack on anyone that dares to have a different opinion that leftist Marxist democrats. They figured out that Trump was using Twitter and FB to counter accusations and lies about him and his administration. They used it to codify the fraudulent election which they were hugely responsible for. They are all created, managed and accountable to the democrat communists. It is sad that so many Americans are willing to believe only what propaganda they spew and look no further.
It’s still big brother stifling free speech. That’s never a good thing.
Yep.
+1
Strswilson,
Ok better point this time and I apologize for making it personal.
Your reasoning is sound but you are entirely missing the main point.
The 230 protection which is government provided immunity is in fact government putting their fingers on the scale. Most often it seems to go againts republicans and conservatives. So freezing someone out of their private platform is legal. If their terms are similar to an at will relationship that is also perfectly legal and should continue to be so. Publicly saying someone is providing false information when it is not false is defamation and slander. Further if people act on this there is liabilty.
If for example they continue to publish(since they exert editorial control they are in fact publishers) then they should have liability. So lets say there is a certain injection advertised as a vaccine that is realy a relatively weak prophylactic that ruins peoples immune systems and causes circulatory and cardio vascular problems in millions of americans. Further twitter has volumes of how good it is and why all should get it including the children. They also promote lockdowns and firing perfectly good workers who chose not to be injected. Their size and influence is real( I agree they may be morons but it is you and I that end up dealing with morons). Now lets say their platform does not contain a single cautionary tale about why someone should take a pause before forcing the injection or firing someone.
Well in the future they should be open to getting their asses sued off in massive class action for promoting lies. Supressing truth is still legal if they wish. So you and I agree we do not trust government. First amendment applies. However you can't have it both ways. The current state of affairs with 230 protections and big monopolistic companies deplatforming individuals and pulling contracted hosting and cloud server support is wrong and a proper DOJ would do something about it.
All that said we are living in times of a failing state and culture so it may not matter much in a few more years.
When the government starts deciding what a private corporation can and cannot promote or disseminate then we become a Banana Republic. The Section 230 protections you mentioned are not limitless. Corporations acting as media companies cannot freely disseminate discriminatory or inflammatory articles without jeopardy. They cannot freely liable someone or defame someone without consequence.
If these media outlets want to ban a user based on their interpretation of the truth, they should be allowed to do so. Sooner or later, users will move to another platform and advertising (which is what keeps these things afloat) will move with the user base. If you simply consider discussion forums for a second - many complain about overreach and the use of the ban stick on members. What happens? Users move to a new platform and the said forum withers into obscurity. That is the Free Market at work.
I do not want the US government picking winners and losers when it comes to commerce and I certainly do not want them deciding what media outlets can and cannot do.
When the government starts deciding what a private corporation can and cannot promote or disseminate then we become a Banana Republic.
Agreed
The Section 230 protections you mentioned are not limitless. Corporations acting as media companies cannot freely disseminate discriminatory or inflammatory articles without jeopardy. They cannot freely liable someone or defame someone without consequence.
Yes they can and it is happening as we speak.
Dr. Robert Malone, the inventor of mRNA technology, was suspended from Twitter shortly after sharing a video explaining why Pfizer's Covid jabs do more harm than good.
As for Marjorie Taylor Greene on one level I do not care. On the other hand then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me....
https://www.pnas.org/content/119/1/e2025334119The role of social media in political discourse has been the topic of intense scholarly and public debate. Politicians and commentators from all sides allege that Twitter’s algorithms amplify their opponents’ voices, or silence theirs. Policy makers and researchers have thus called for increased transparency on how algorithms influence exposure to political content on the platform. Based on a massive-scale experiment involving millions of Twitter users, a fine-grained analysis of political parties in seven countries, and 6.2 million news articles shared in the United States, this study carries out the most comprehensive audit of an algorithmic recommender system and its effects on political content. Results unveil that the political right enjoys higher amplification compared to the political left.
Just another day of big tech doing big tech stuff
When the government starts deciding what a private corporation can and cannot promote or disseminate then we become a Banana Republic.
Agreed
The Section 230 protections you mentioned are not limitless. Corporations acting as media companies cannot freely disseminate discriminatory or inflammatory articles without jeopardy. They cannot freely liable someone or defame someone without consequence.
Yes they can and it is happening as we speak.
Dr. Robert Malone, the inventor of mRNA technology, was suspended from Twitter shortly after sharing a video explaining why Pfizer's Covid jabs do more harm than good.
As for Marjorie Taylor Greene on one level I do not care. On the other hand then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me....
There are plenty of legal remedies for those who have been defamed and/or liabled. Private corporations are not immune to prosecution and there are several class action filings currenting circulating to hold these companies accountable for their actions.
There are plenty of news sources that allow Green and Dr. Malone the ability to openly share their views. They have not been thrown in jail for their opinions. Twitter is only one of thousands of news sources available. If you don't like them, choose another.
I do not like the government coordinating with news agencies to push their narrative, but at the end of the day, that has been happening since the 1960's. There is no way to legislate our way out of that reality - unless you just want the Government to control everything.
https://www.pnas.org/content/119/1/e2025334119The role of social media in political discourse has been the topic of intense scholarly and public debate. Politicians and commentators from all sides allege that Twitter’s algorithms amplify their opponents’ voices, or silence theirs. Policy makers and researchers have thus called for increased transparency on how algorithms influence exposure to political content on the platform. Based on a massive-scale experiment involving millions of Twitter users, a fine-grained analysis of political parties in seven countries, and 6.2 million news articles shared in the United States, this study carries out the most comprehensive audit of an algorithmic recommender system and its effects on political content. Results unveil that the political right enjoys higher amplification compared to the political left.
Prepared in part by:
aMachine Learning Ethics, Transparency, and Accountability Team, Twitter, San Francisco, CA 94103;
Hmm I wonder what conclusion they will reach.....
Therefore, although a randomized controlled experiment, our experiment does not satisfy the well-known Stable Unit Treatment Value Assumption from causal inference (23). As a consequence, it cannot provide unbiased estimates of causal quantities of interest, such as the average treatment effect. In this study, we chose to not employ intricate causal inference machinery that is often used to approximate causal quantities
Well would ya look at that. They decided to not use generally accepted statistcal analysis protocol to measure opinions....
Not worth diddly
Strswilson,
Ok better point this time and I apologize for making it personal.
Your reasoning is sound but you are entirely missing the main point.
The 230 protection which is government provided immunity is in fact government putting their fingers on the scale. Most often it seems to go againts republicans and conservatives. So freezing someone out of their private platform is legal. If their terms are similar to an at will relationship that is also perfectly legal and should continue to be so. Publicly saying someone is providing false information when it is not false is defamation and slander. Further if people act on this there is liabilty.
If for example they continue to publish(since they exert editorial control they are in fact publishers) then they should have liability. So lets say there is a certain injection advertised as a vaccine that is realy a relatively weak prophylactic that ruins peoples immune systems and causes circulatory and cardio vascular problems in millions of americans. Further twitter has volumes of how good it is and why all should get it including the children. They also promote lockdowns and firing perfectly good workers who chose not to be injected. Their size and influence is real( I agree they may be morons but it is you and I that end up dealing with morons). Now lets say their platform does not contain a single cautionary tale about why someone should take a pause before forcing the injection or firing someone.
Well in the future they should be open to getting their asses sued off in massive class action for promoting lies. Supressing truth is still legal if they wish. So you and I agree we do not trust government. First amendment applies. However you can't have it both ways. The current state of affairs with 230 protections and big monopolistic companies deplatforming individuals and pulling contracted hosting and cloud server support is wrong and a proper DOJ would do something about it.
All that said we are living in times of a failing state and culture so it may not matter much in a few more years.
When the government starts deciding what a private corporation can and cannot promote or disseminate then we become a Banana Republic. The Section 230 protections you mentioned are not limitless. Corporations acting as media companies cannot freely disseminate discriminatory or inflammatory articles without jeopardy. They cannot freely liable someone or defame someone without consequence.
If these media outlets want to ban a user based on their interpretation of the truth, they should be allowed to do so. Sooner or later, users will move to another platform and advertising (which is what keeps these things afloat) will move with the user base. If you simply consider discussion forums for a second - many complain about overreach and the use of the ban stick on members. What happens? Users move to a new platform and the said forum withers into obscurity. That is the Free Market at work.
I do not want the US government picking winners and losers when it comes to commerce and I certainly do not want them deciding what media outlets can and cannot do.
And yet they do. Twitter is an extension of the DNC and this administration. They should lose their protection. I'm asking for the government to not interfere. Protection is interference.
It's a badge of honor.
Don't trust anyone who hasn't been!
Quote from STRSWILSON
"There are plenty of news sources that allow Green and Dr. Malone the ability to openly share their views. They have not been thrown in jail for their opinions. Twitter is only one of thousands of news sources available. If you don't like them, choose another. "
Please let us know what these thousands of new sources that are available to us are?Most of the general public has no idea there are other resources besides CBS,MSNBC,Twitter,Facebook,CNN,Bloomberg.They are taught that Fox,Newsmax,Steve Bannon and Anyone else who oppose them are bad .The majority of News Information is nothing more than Propaganda arm of the Demonrat Communist Party.As far as Twitter and FaceFuck depending on advertisement for solvency that is a joke.They are the playthings of Rich Woke people that will prop them up regardless if they make any income.Twitter and FaceFuck are using their influence for Political reasons which is exactly why 230 should be pulled from them.They are one of the reasons Trump lost this last election,beside the election being rigged.The MSM reports none of this and its time the playing field is evened.Either that or chit has to fly!!
Strswilson,
Ok better point this time and I apologize for making it personal.
Your reasoning is sound but you are entirely missing the main point.
The 230 protection which is government provided immunity is in fact government putting their fingers on the scale. Most often it seems to go againts republicans and conservatives. So freezing someone out of their private platform is legal. If their terms are similar to an at will relationship that is also perfectly legal and should continue to be so. Publicly saying someone is providing false information when it is not false is defamation and slander. Further if people act on this there is liabilty.
If for example they continue to publish(since they exert editorial control they are in fact publishers) then they should have liability. So lets say there is a certain injection advertised as a vaccine that is realy a relatively weak prophylactic that ruins peoples immune systems and causes circulatory and cardio vascular problems in millions of americans. Further twitter has volumes of how good it is and why all should get it including the children. They also promote lockdowns and firing perfectly good workers who chose not to be injected. Their size and influence is real( I agree they may be morons but it is you and I that end up dealing with morons). Now lets say their platform does not contain a single cautionary tale about why someone should take a pause before forcing the injection or firing someone.
Well in the future they should be open to getting their asses sued off in massive class action for promoting lies. Supressing truth is still legal if they wish. So you and I agree we do not trust government. First amendment applies. However you can't have it both ways. The current state of affairs with 230 protections and big monopolistic companies deplatforming individuals and pulling contracted hosting and cloud server support is wrong and a proper DOJ would do something about it.
All that said we are living in times of a failing state and culture so it may not matter much in a few more years.
When the government starts deciding what a private corporation can and cannot promote or disseminate then we become a Banana Republic. The Section 230 protections you mentioned are not limitless. Corporations acting as media companies cannot freely disseminate discriminatory or inflammatory articles without jeopardy. They cannot freely liable someone or defame someone without consequence.
If these media outlets want to ban a user based on their interpretation of the truth, they should be allowed to do so. Sooner or later, users will move to another platform and advertising (which is what keeps these things afloat) will move with the user base. If you simply consider discussion forums for a second - many complain about overreach and the use of the ban stick on members. What happens? Users move to a new platform and the said forum withers into obscurity. That is the Free Market at work.
I do not want the US government picking winners and losers when it comes to commerce and I certainly do not want them deciding what media outlets can and cannot do.
And yet they do. Twitter is an extension of the DNC and this administration. They should lose their protection. I'm asking for the government to not interfere. Protection is interference.
Yep
She got banned for presenting the CDC's own data and graphs. If that's not scary, I don't know what is. We have a private business determining what government data we can see.
I find it rather ironically humorous that a twit isn't allowed to post on twitter
What do you expect after she violated their " misinformation only policy" by posting facts?
3,2,1 and there it is! Total coincidence. No speed dial involved.
Collusion: Facebook Suspends Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene For ‘Misinformation’ One Day After Twitter Ban
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...eene-misinformation-one-day-twitter-ban/
Sayonara and hope she gets her head outta her buttox.
I want US courts to review this. This is becoming a dangerous monopoly involving big tech, the media ,our hostile intel agencies our entrenched govt bureaucrats and the biggest global corporations. The media can put out hit pieces and continuous lies with zero push back or fact checking because they are the only ones allowed to check their own lies. It's impossible to start up competition because the competition is immediately shut down and defunded by big banks, deplatformed by big tech , and regulated out of business by entrenched govt bureaucrats.
Now a few billionaires can literally manipulate our elections and politics discounting tens of millions of our votes like happened in the last election.
Strswilson,
Ok better point this time and I apologize for making it personal.
Your reasoning is sound but you are entirely missing the main point.
The 230 protection which is government provided immunity is in fact government putting their fingers on the scale. Most often it seems to go againts republicans and conservatives. So freezing someone out of their private platform is legal. If their terms are similar to an at will relationship that is also perfectly legal and should continue to be so. Publicly saying someone is providing false information when it is not false is defamation and slander. Further if people act on this there is liabilty.
If for example they continue to publish(since they exert editorial control they are in fact publishers) then they should have liability. So lets say there is a certain injection advertised as a vaccine that is realy a relatively weak prophylactic that ruins peoples immune systems and causes circulatory and cardio vascular problems in millions of americans. Further twitter has volumes of how good it is and why all should get it including the children. They also promote lockdowns and firing perfectly good workers who chose not to be injected. Their size and influence is real( I agree they may be morons but it is you and I that end up dealing with morons). Now lets say their platform does not contain a single cautionary tale about why someone should take a pause before forcing the injection or firing someone.
Well in the future they should be open to getting their asses sued off in massive class action for promoting lies. Supressing truth is still legal if they wish. So you and I agree we do not trust government. First amendment applies. However you can't have it both ways. The current state of affairs with 230 protections and big monopolistic companies deplatforming individuals and pulling contracted hosting and cloud server support is wrong and a proper DOJ would do something about it.
All that said we are living in times of a failing state and culture so it may not matter much in a few more years.
When the government starts deciding what a private corporation can and cannot promote or disseminate then we become a Banana Republic. The Section 230 protections you mentioned are not limitless. Corporations acting as media companies cannot freely disseminate discriminatory or inflammatory articles without jeopardy. They cannot freely liable someone or defame someone without consequence.
If these media outlets want to ban a user based on their interpretation of the truth, they should be allowed to do so. Sooner or later, users will move to another platform and advertising (which is what keeps these things afloat) will move with the user base. If you simply consider discussion forums for a second - many complain about overreach and the use of the ban stick on members. What happens? Users move to a new platform and the said forum withers into obscurity. That is the Free Market at work.
I do not want the US government picking winners and losers when it comes to commerce and I certainly do not want them deciding what media outlets can and cannot do.
Sayonara and hope she gets her head outta her buttox.
and the Wisconsin child sniffing doooshbag chimes in