My Sentiments Towards G/O Media
-
-
@krustywantout I just sent them a lovely email explaining all of my thoughts and feelings. They are just so stupid, it's almost like Trump was in charge of G/O. I asked them if they wanted people to visit their websites, that is the point right? They had people crisscrossing the platform and now I will not really look at it very much.
-
God I love the video for this. The lawnmower scene cracked me up when I was 10 and it cracks me up now.
Also G/O can kiss my fat ass.
-
The thing that blows my mind is that with Trump leaving office the changes to Section 230 that prompted this aren't coming. There will likely be revamps but more along the lines of curbing the spread of violence and disinformation not in the banning of all moderation and holding a platform liable for all content that Trump wanted.
-
@jminer said in My Sentiments Towards G/O Media:
The thing that blows my mind is that with Trump leaving office the changes to Section 230 that prompted this aren't coming. There will likely be revamps but more along the lines of curbing the spread of violence and disinformation not in the banning of all moderation and holding a platform liable for all content that Trump wanted.
WAIT.....so, G/O is going ahead with killing Oppo (and the other communities) DESPITE the laws that they THOUGHT necessitated it not even coming into effect???
-
@rallydarkstrike That's my take on it. Without getting too far into the weeds or too political here's a brief explanation on US law and liability for internet providers.
Section 230 is a a part of the law that was created in the 90's to give folks creating platforms (like this or Kinja, or Facebook and so on) a release in liability from what folks post on their site. Previously it has been regulated like a newspaper or other media source which is 100% legally liable for everything they say/do/print.
This is still how the law exists, the law does allow for content moderation, and also since these entities are not the government they're also exempt from any free-speech duties as well.
The trump administration liked to scream that tech companies like twitter and facebook were censoring right wing voices. Side-note the opposite is true and they actually cater to and amplify right-wing voices. In response they've threatened to change how they interpret or revoke Section 230 which would remove the liability protection regarding user content.
Now that he is not the US President anymore this will not happen.
There are likely to be future changes to Section 230 as it does need some tweaks, but not a major change that would fuck up everything.
-
@jminer said in My Sentiments Towards G/O Media:
@rallydarkstrike That's my take on it. Without getting too far into the weeds or too political here's a brief explanation on US law and liability for internet providers.
Section 230 is a a part of the law that was created in the 90's to give folks creating platforms (like this or Kinja, or Facebook and so on) a release in liability from what folks post on their site. Previously it has been regulated like a newspaper or other media source which is 100% legally liable for everything they say/do/print.
This is still how the law exists, the law does allow for content moderation, and also since these entities are not the government they're also exempt from any free-speech duties as well.
The trump administration liked to scream that tech companies like twitter and facebook were censoring right wing voices. Side-note the opposite is true and they actually cater to and amplify right-wing voices. In response they've threatened to change how they interpret or revoke Section 230 which would remove the liability protection regarding user content.
Now that he is not the US President anymore this will not happen.
There are likely to be future changes to Section 230 as it does need some tweaks, but not a major change that would fuck up everything.
Wow.....then the fact G/O is doing this is even MORE bullsh*t....
-
Fuck 'em.
-
@rallydarkstrike
My impression from the start was they just wanted the sub-blogs gone... just because that’s what upper management wanted.
Blaming it on the potential legal liability would only hold water if it was done after the legal changes went through.
In my view, blaming it on legal liability was always a bullshit cover story so they could do this without pissing off their readers.I’ve seen this bullshit “we can’t do it because of the legal liability” before.
Reminds me a bit of the “we have to crush all these EV1 electric cars because of the liability” bullshit GM pulled back in the early 2000s.
That was also a case of management just wanting something done to meet their less-than-honourable objectives of fighting the ZEV mandate and using “legal liability” as the bullshit excuse.That situation boiled my blood as much as this one.
And they don’t realize that by doing shit like this causes management to go from “hero to zero” in no time... and it’s very hard to recover the company reputation after pulling shit like that.
I still have a fantasy of somehow acquiring one of the surviving GM EV1 cars, buying the necessary ports to re-enable it (which I think can be sourced from a company called AC Propulsion) and then drive it and park it in from of GM’s headquarters.
