To his surprise mr. Sum got, immediately after being informed by Robert Post on how to understand freedom of expression in the USA the opportunity to apply his new insights, when he read the following in Politico magazine:
President Donald Trump and his supporters have been hammering Twitter since the social network labeled a pair of his tweets with a fact-checking notice for the first time on Tuesday.
President Donald Trump is expected to sign an executive order aimed at social media companies Thursday, White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany told reporters Wednesday evening, a move that comes as the president and his allies have escalated their allegations that companies like Twitter and Facebook stifle GOP voices.
The announcement revived fears within the online industry that the Trump administration will target a 1996 statute that protects the companies from lawsuits — an avenue that a growing number of Republican lawmakers are advocating as they press their bias accusations about Silicon Valley.
By CRISTIANO LIMA, 05/27/2020 07:36 PM EDT, Updated: 05/28/2020 12:51 AM EDT
First mr. Sum Googled for “GOP” and got informed of its meaning: grand old party, as used by and for the republican party. Very unamerican not to know that.
Now he feels free to try and understand what is going on. Following the Robert Post doctrine we have to look for institutions and their functions in order to come to grips with questions on freedom of expression. We have Donald Trump, president of the USA on the one hand and we choose Jack Dorsey, CEO of Twitter on the other. CNN reports on the latter’s position as follows:
New York (CNN Business)Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey says that labeling two of President Donald Trump’s tweets with fact checks does not make the social media company an “arbiter of truth.”
“Our intention is to connect the dots of conflicting statements and show the information in dispute so people can judge for themselves. More transparency from us is critical so folks can clearly see the why behind our actions,” Dorsey tweeted Wednesday night.
Dorsey was responding to a firestorm of criticism the company has received from conservatives after Twitter began fact checking Trump, who is arguably its most prolific user. Trump has also threatened to take action against Silicon Valley.
So do these antagonists have a first-amendment defences against the action(s) of the other? If so, in what role(s) ? What are the interests their institutions do or are meant to instantiate? What is at stake here?
Let me think, mr. Sum mumbled, let me think …