The Supreme Court will hear arguments on Republican-backed laws in Florida and Texas limiting the ability of social media companies to censor content based on the user’s political views. NBC News’ Ken Dilanian reports on the implications of the decision and how it could affect social media usage.
» Subscribe to NBC News: https://www.youtube.com/user/NBCNews
NBC News Digital is a collection of innovative and powerful news brands that deliver compelling, diverse and engaging news stories. NBC News Digital features NBCNews.com, MSNBC.com, TODAY.com, Nightly News, Meet the Press, Dateline, and the existing apps and digital extensions of these respective properties. We deliver the best in breaking news, live video coverage, original journalism and segments from your favorite NBC News Shows.
Connect with NBC News Online!
Breaking News Alerts: https://link.nbcnews.com/join/5cj/breaking-news-signup?cid=sm_npd_nn_yt_bn-clip_190621
Visit NBCNews.Com: https://www.nbcnews.com/
Find NBC News on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/NBCNews
Follow NBC News on Twitter: https://twitter.com/NBCNews
Get more of NBC News delivered to your inbox: nbcnews.com/newsletters
Supreme Court to hear arguments over laws on social media censorship
#SupremeCourt #SocialMedia #Politics
source
Were removing the sound of screaming children from our mass shootings and we're debating this while guns are the #1 killer of children in these United states
Truth boards is an interesting term
“ whose truth “.
Dangerous times
The private social media companies have become the extension of the federal government to control the public. That was obvious with Twitter during the 2020 election. And that was obvious when the state department used twitter to overthrow the foreign governments. When the freedom of speech on the social media backfired at home, the federal government started suppressing it through the mainstream media and through the social media platforms, since we are living under the dictatorship of the Military-Industrial-Congressional-Media Complex, that has expanded now to the Military-Industrial-Congressional-Media-Technology Complex.
You can find the information about how it works in the Tucker’s interview with Mike Benz: “The national security state is the main driver of censorship and election interference in the United States. "What I’m describing is military rule," says Mike Benz. "It’s the inversion of democracy."
Too bad SCOTUS isnt looking into one sided corp media propaganda tools , eh DNBC news? Also isnt msnbc a partner of yours?
Free speech is important. So is shutting down the mass spread of misinformation. When one side has gone down a rabbit hole of conspiracy theories, taking everything a compulsive liar and criminal says as truth, it makes sense that side is getting censored more, to be honest.
Americans are owned by Z1on!sts
Would net neutrality protect users of social media against political discrimination as long as the content was not deemed as hatespeech?
Hate speech, misinformation, and propaganda are the core tenets of the GOP platform, no wonder they want to limit moderation of social media.
Freedom of speech does not exist. Watch. This message will be deleted: India is the world's dirty diaper. Seems pretty harmless, right? No foul language. A little shade thrown India's way, but nothing that Americans haven't endured in terms of other countries throwing us shade. But it will be taken down. Because there is no freedom of speech.
Chick's wearing my Grandmother's bathroom curtains.
Great video NBC News and I feel like they should limit it because they have been censoring stuff that should not be censored at all.
Wow
Republicans fighting for free speech again, democrats are tyrants.
An observation. If the social media companies win this case on the grounds of protecting their right of free speech then this implies that the Biden Admin et al were and are wrong to coerce social media into changing their terms and/or censoring users.
So the Republicans who want less moderation and the Democrats who want more would BOTH have to take a hike!
Censorship incoming😮
I want to hear them vote on chumps..instead
HUH, GIVEN LETTERS IN THE MAIL. FOR LEGAL PURPOSES?
It's not great to have the scotus fundamentalist 6 deciding such an important case. They say they believe in the first amendment but they make decisions based more on their ideology. It's hard to believe this case even though this far. TOS are clearly spelled out when you join a social media network. If you don't like the terms join a different network like Twitter or chump social
One solution: make social media liable for libel and slander just like newspapers
They want to be able to push their propaganda without us being able to fact check them. Going back to dark ages.
SCOTUS already ruled any business can refuse service to a customer. Web designer case.
“When exposing a crime is treated as committing a crime, you are being ruled by criminals.” – Edward Snowden
This will likely lead to argument of what defines a public space in today's technology age. Pending it is not already being considered in this case. This might even go back to the concept of whether cooperations are considered people as it relates to constitutional rights. The rabbit hole goes deep with this one.
YouTube listening ? 😂
Who is this quack that said, "Section 130" and how is he employed?
“Social media” is a waste of bandwidth.
If you had no onlookers they would make no money😂😂😂
And they would rather give the watered down version of what news is what it is 🤔
They're free to use 4chan and Truth social
Its all a form of control that's it thats all …smh
the senators who confirmed Justices Clarence Thomas, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh represented less than half the population. A court so constituted would arguably face a legitimacy crisis were it to start overturning legislation enacted by a popularly elected Democratic president and Congress. RESTRUCTURE THE SO-CALLED supreme court. They are destroying democracy
Whatever the Catholic church decides is what will happen. 🤨
If we go by the idea that somebody is responsible for what is posted, then either:
-The company is rsponsible, and can moderate what's posted, or
– The one who posts is responsible and then users have to be clearly identified, at least in a company register.
Nobody responsible does not seem an option in countries based on laws.
On one hand, social media companies want to be viewed as a platform or as a publisher when it suits their needs. When it does not, they will basically switch the classification.
Therefore, since they continue to act like entitled spoiled children, they should receive adult supervision by the court.
0:28 By the way, it is pretty rich of them to bring up the free speech concept. 😂
My social media account got hacked.
remove loose change but not the loose screws
I don't believe politicians should be on social media if they want the speech and debate clause to exist outside of official channels.
This network needs to stop censoring facts, and stop promoting falsehoods and outright lies
Give me my accounts back that you deleted me for expressing my opinions and pay me back for the money I lost when you deleted my accounts
Ive been banned from faceboom for voicing my poltical stance so many times for years and years now
Propaganda
Social media companies are doing exactly NOTHING to protect minors on their platforms. There are independent studies done showing that these companies actually target young people with harmful content through their algorithms. They are sent content regarding self-harm , drug use, and pornographic material.
I know that there is liberty of press But there should be a law to prevent ALL MEDIA to lie to the people noingly and subject to be liable to be fined that could go hase fare hase losing there brodcasting permit That would solve so many problems in the society
The government has no business on what a PRIVATE business like Twitter can or cannot have on their platforms unless theres threatening or incitment type of speech.
I cant believe "conservatives" are actually HOPING to and allowing the GOVERNMENT (something they have deemed to be a nuisance) to REGULATE what my private business should allow. If a literal Communist who justifies the deaths of Stalin regime were to be on my plateform and result in users on my plateform to leave because this type of content isnt brought down, then i should be well in my right to regulate what is said in MY plateform if it results in economic consequences, deliberate misinformation or outright hateful rhetoric!
My a$$ that they care about preventing tolitariarian governments from rising up when they advocate for BS like this that contradicts their fundamental beliefs of freedom of speech.
"EXTREMIST/EXTREMISM"??? 3:36
Similar to terms like "hate speech", Leftists are great at twisting language, creating euphemisms and labels to cover up the truth and their desire to control the dumb masses.
"Alternative lifestyle" = homosexual. "An Affair" = adultery. "Fiver-finger-discount" = theft/stealing.
So rather than be honest and say 'We want to censor speech that offends us or that we don't agree with', they lie with mental constructs meant to deceive and obscure their agenda. Squash freedom and control you.
1st amd stops gov not people.
Just a delay in absolute immunity case, he doesn't. Say it so trump can get served justice he should've gotten years ago
The only way to stop the media from influencing the election.
Is there some way to find out who bribed them the most, so we can know the outcome before they officially render judgement? Nobody has faith in the impartiality of the court. They are bought and paid for.
We need freedom online