If you didn't understand this one, why try to explain others to you? This one was easy.

If you start fact checking members, you are putting yourself in a position to be held liable for the content. I still say it's a bad move that will open up a can of worms.

This^^^^

I don’t agree with his tactics either, but once I figured out the game, I don’t get worked up about it. What he has done to expose the media as incompetents at best and biased children at worst is OK with me.

I think I'm mostly past getting emotionally involved in anything that comes from his direction. It's like John175 posts. When you know he's a troll, and you know you're being trolled just to get any reaction, it kinda takes the sting out of it.

Ricochet shot!

You are either for free speech and free press or you are against it. FB and Twitter have morphed into something that is uncomfortable. People are viewing this almost as a viable source of information. You start censoring stuff, political views etc you are walking a dangerous line. Way too much power in the hands of those doing the censoring.

Troll?

Thanks perpetually angry woman.

Twitter got a lot of criticism for refusing to delete his tweets accusing Joe Scarborough of murder. They fact checked him the next day to compensate for it. In the future, I think they will just delete his tweets that make unfounded murder accusations, or that may insite violence. His reaction will probably be the same, but it probably wont hold up in court.

Twitter is a private company with user rules. They have deleted tweets, suspended and banned users, for tweets that violate their rules over the past year or so. They just have never applied those same rules to the cry baby in the White House before.

Tweeter wants to fire their number one salesman. Typical liberal move.

Vote!!!

How does Twitter know it’s unfounded? Because the widower said it is?

The entire point is that Twitter can’t possibly police that type of speech equally. There is no way they can do it successfully. And to do it to the POTUS is a lose-lose situation for them. Private company for sure, if you don’t like it, leave, or you can make a stink and cause issues for the platform. Same way he treats the media, and they keep falling for it. Then, they make it even worse by proving him right.

Plus, they aren’t deleting or fact checking tweets made by middle eastern leaders regarding Israel, to use one example.

Once again, that’s the entire point of what Trump has been doing this week on Twitter and with the media for 3.5 years. I don’t agree with his tactics, but the results are incredible, especially when you look at the people who consider themselves enlightened or intelligent and still get bent out of shape over it.

That’s why he keeps doing this stuff. I’m not saying it’s right, but he is exposing people left and right. People keep saying he is immature or acing like a child are right there on the playground with him.

So if socail media sites become liable for false or damageing information posted by others, wont that require them to moderate their content more heavily than they do now? Isn't that the opposite of what Trump wants them to do? His post would be a liability to them.

They are gonna become liable because they are acting as editors. If they are gonna do that then they are liable. If they purely provide a platform then they arent.