Nice intentions of the conference, but little can be done (1a right of social media companies).  Unless this is  a stepping stone for a XO/law down the road.

Nice intentions of the conference, but little can be done (1a right of social media companies).  Unless this is  a stepping stone for a XO/law down the road.

I don't know what your reference to 1A rights means.

First Amendment only applies to the government.  I can keep you from burning a flag as long as I don't assault you, but law enforcement or public school officials can't (as long as there's no fire laws or rules being violated and any required permits are obtained).

First amendment also protects the free press, which at this stage doesn't apply to social media platforms.

The biggest issue is SM corporations are trying to control online content through censorship, which should make them publishers and subject to liable, slander and defamation lawsuits.  However they are claiming protection from such civil actions by labeling themselves "platforms" which is analogous to a utility like the phone company.  As a platform, they aren't responsible for what people post and share.  They get their cake and eat it, too.

The issues are confusing and convoluted.  Trump (and other public accounts on Twitter, FB, etc) can't legally ban people.  However, the platform CAN ban or mute them.  So, is the platform operator then acting as an agent of the gov't account holder by providing the forum apparatus? If so, then they can't ban anyone who follows a gov't account.  What of people following emergency notification accounts?  What happens when that subscriber is banned and misses a safety alert?  Is the platform liable for injuries?  Damages? Deaths?

SM is a new frontier.  As always, it'll take time for laws, regulations and public/private input to catch up.  In the meantime, all the SM giants are actively gearing up to make sure Trump isn't re-elected.

I wonder if that constitutes in-kind contributions to his opponent?

So, the truth was on full display.  The major corporate networks can't stand independent Social Media content creators, in part because they cut into profits, but also because independent creators are running rings around the so-called "free press" by posting facts over opinions.

From Benghazi to Obamacare, from Hillary's server to Kavanaugh, the MSM is an obvious arm of the DNC.  Meanwhile, people who want to spread the truth are destroying those biased narratives being pushed on the public for decades.


A CNN staffer was heckling the SM Summit attendees, going so far as to accuse them of demonic possession, arguing they are not "real journalists", and even daring Sebastian Gorka to "take it outside" with him.

The press has been dubbed "The 4th Branch of Government" for a long time.  They now make the news about themselves after the label "Fake News" stuck.

The exhibition in the Rose Garden is just more proof "real journalists" are threatened by SM independent creators, which is why the tech giants FB, Twitter and Google are targeting those creators.

I hope this is the start of a Free Press paradigm shift, where truth trumps bias and revenue regardless of who reports it.

Nice intentions of the conference, but little can be done (1a right of social media companies).  Unless this is  a stepping stone for a XO/law down the road.

I am dumbfounded by the people who want more regulations on harassment/sexism/etc when it comes to online sources such as Facebook and online video games. These are platforms where it is fundamentally easy to block a person. Playing a game and some idiot makes sexist joke to a female gamer? Block him! Someone sends harassing texts on facebook? Block them!

But no, we need laws and social media needs to be more responsible at tackling the problem as if they can control what we think or regulating us will change our opinions. The dumbing of America.