X, the social media company previously known as Twitter, is suing the state of California over a law that requires companies to disclose details about their content moderation practices.

X is suing California over social media content moderation law::X, the social media company previously known as Twitter, is suing the state of California over a law that requires companies to disclose details about their content moderation practices.

  • MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    523·
    1 year ago

    Did you expect any better of an argument from the type of politician who thinks they’re entitled to this kind of intrusive bullshit?

        • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.worldEnglish
          2·
          1 year ago

          What do you mean?

          Edit: Oh, you mean “if you have nothing to hide you won’t mind us spying” one? I couldn’t agree more if I tried!

        • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.worldEnglish
          101·
          1 year ago

          It’s not “private shit it has no business asking for”, it’s proof that social media platforms are upholding the special duties that come with the special privileges being the “public square” of the internet.

            • NuPNuA@lemm.eeEnglish
              91·
              1 year ago

              Yes there is, you can go to Speakers Corner, a literal public square, and talk about all kinds of nonsense, but if you bust out the Nazi regalia you’ll be shut down quick sharp by the old bill.

            • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.worldEnglish
              81·
              1 year ago

              Yeah there is. It’s called public safety. The January 6th attempted coup was (poorly, but still) planned on Twitter, Facebook and Parler. If those three had been better moderated when it comes to hate speech and misinformation, the 9 people who died as a result of it would probably be alive today.

            • dragonflyteaparty@lemmy.worldEnglish
              61·
              1 year ago

              What is precisely unlimited about this? Should companies be able to keep whatever they want behind the curtain and we aren’t allowed to ask what it is?

              • MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
                111·
                1 year ago

                You said that government business is whatever the government passes laws about, which literally gives the government unlimited justification to do anything and everything because, by definition, it’s the proper business of government under that standard.

                • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.worldEnglish
                  41·
                  1 year ago

                  It’s the job of the government to inspect and regulate businesses and this is a reasonable and frankly way overdue example of them doing exactly that. Nothing unreasonable about it and calling it unlimited intrusion or whatever makes you look like the dumbest of libertarians, which is REALLY saying something.

                  • MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
                    111·
                    1 year ago

                    No, it isn’t the purpose of government to just make demands of private businesses. It’s absolutely unreasonable for the government to do so with intent to censor

            • CmdrShepard@lemmy.oneEnglish
              51·
              1 year ago

              Is that what they did or did they just create a narrowly defined law for a specific purpose?