Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Mike Masnick ✅ (mmasnick@mastodon.social)'s status on Wednesday, 28-Feb-2024 07:58:11 JST Mike Masnick ✅

   Okay, we've had some banger posts on Techdirt today so I'm sharing. First up, a summary of yesterday's Supreme Court hearing on the future of the internet, in which (incredibly) I try to explain what Alito meant when asking about the weight of YouTube (it was dumb, but not for the reasons everyone thinks). https://www.techdirt.com/2024/02/27/sir-this-is-a-supreme-court-not-a-wendys/

   • Embed this notice
     Mike Masnick ✅ (mmasnick@mastodon.social)'s status on Wednesday, 28-Feb-2024 08:00:48 JST Mike Masnick ✅

     in reply to

     Next, an analysis of the astoundingly silly 77 page "threat letter" that Bill Ackman's wife (though, really, Ackman himself) sent to Axel Springer over Business Insider's stories. Ackman seems incapable of comprehending the underlying issue. https://www.techdirt.com/2024/02/27/bill-ackmans-wife-sends-hilarious-misleading-defamation-threat-letter-to-business-insider-that-confirms-bill-ackman-is-a-censorial-hypocrite/

   • Embed this notice
     Mike Masnick ✅ (mmasnick@mastodon.social)'s status on Wednesday, 28-Feb-2024 08:01:58 JST Mike Masnick ✅

     in reply to

     • Karl Bode

     And finally, some righteous fire from @KarlBode about the managerial incompetence destroying various journalism outlets. https://www.techdirt.com/2024/02/27/the-vice-media-collapse-was-entirely-the-fault-of-incompetent-fail-upward-brunchlords/

   • Embed this notice
     Mike Masnick ✅ (mmasnick@mastodon.social)'s status on Wednesday, 28-Feb-2024 09:10:42 JST Mike Masnick ✅

     in reply to

     • David

     @david1 that's incorrect. Only (c)(2) requires "good faith" and it is for anything "otherwise objectionable" which only the site itself can decide. (c)(1) allows for moderation whether in good faith or not.

     Separately, the 1st Amendment allows for moderation.

     Neither of those issues has *anything* to do with common carrier status.

   • Embed this notice
     David (david1@mastodon.world)'s status on Wednesday, 28-Feb-2024 09:10:44 JST David

     in reply to

     @mmasnick I would say the Thomas/Gorsuch view Section 230 turns media companies into common carriers makes more sense than you make it out to be. Section 230 allows companies to legally do content moderation but only if such actions are "taken in good faith". For example, if left wing spam, but not right wing spam, is blocked, it's not in good faith. But this inability to be partisan about spams is what is meant by calling them "common carriers".