Nichols: Trump’s presidency can be understood as a four-year assault on journalism
...Trump’s presidency can be understood as a four-year assault on journalism, in which he has attacked individual reporters, newspapers, and television news networks with a fury that was evident on Thanksgiving Day, when he held a deranged press conference—while seated at a “kid’s table” desk—and started ranting in response to Reuters White House correspondent Jeff Mason’s question about when Trump might finally concede his loss. “Don’t talk to me that way,” raged Trump. “You’re just a lightweight. Don’t talk to me [like] that—I’m the president of the United States. Don’t ever talk to the president that way.”
Trump’s tantrum produced a mocking Twitter hashtag—#DiaperDon—that trended to the top of social media and embarrassed the egomaniacal president to such an extent that he snapped and raged—falsely: “Twitter is sending out totally false ‘Trends;’ that have absolutely nothing to do with what is really trending in the world. They make it up, and only negative ‘stuff.’” Then he tweeted something that should unsettle everyone who understands the role of social media in modern political communications: “For purposes of National Security, Section 230 must be immediately terminated!!!”
Crafted by Congress in 1996, Section 230 declares, “No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.” As the Electronic Frontier Foundation explains, “It shields websites from legal liability for the material users post on their platforms. Section 230 also gives these sites the leeway they need to moderate content that violates their community standards.”
Trump doesn’t like that moderation, as it identifies his lies. In July, the Trump administration petitioned the Federal Communications Commission—where a 3-2 Republican majority has frequently done the president’s bidding—with a demand that commissioners craft a rule that could gut Section 230 protections. That’s incredibly dangerous.
“If the FCC grants the administration’s proposal, no websites or platforms would be able to set their own standards for their online communities,” explains Gaurav Laroia, the senior counsel for the grassroots media and democracy group Free Press. “It would seriously threaten the ability of marginalized groups to organize and express their views without the government forcing them to allow racist and sexist interlopers into every conversation. It would leave sites little choice but to drown in posts from bigots, propagandists, conspiracy theorists and trolls.”
https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/trump-section-230/
Comments
Post a Comment