The battle between Twitter and Trump is escalating, and this might not end well for the rest of us. Trump's executive order on social media achieves little, but it's more of a threat that it could change the way the Internet works.
#Thread 1/n
whitehouse.gov/presidential-a…
#Thread 1/n
whitehouse.gov/presidential-a…
(2/n) Reason why we're can upload content on sites like YouTube,FB,Reddit,Twitter,every forum,all blogs (w comments) is because 230(c) of US Communications Decency Act provides safe harbor: platform/ISP is not liable for content that you and I create( but we are). +
(3/n) This is why Facebook allows you to post on Facebook. Blogs and Reddit allow you to comment. YouTube allows you to upload your videos. ISPs allow you to create your own site. Therefore, 230(c) (& India's IT Act Section 79) PROTECT the platforms that ENABLE our free speech.
(4/n) 230(c) allows these platforms to impose their own community standards and "in good faith", violate free speech rights of US Citizens by restricting access to content which might not abide by these standards: 
(5/n) A lot rides on that phrase "good faith". Trump's executive order has the following policy goals:
1. Act against platforms not acting in “good faith”; which are engaging in "deceptive or pretextual actions" to "stifle viewpoints with which they disagree."
1. Act against platforms not acting in “good faith”; which are engaging in "deceptive or pretextual actions" to "stifle viewpoints with which they disagree."
(6/n) Trump has cites 16,000 complaints of online platforms censoring or otherwise taking action against users based on their political viewpoints an anti-right winged bias wrt Twitter in his executive order. This will resonate in India👇
(7/n) Last year, @ianuragthakur led Parliamentary Standing Committe on IT also hauled up Twitter India for allegedly having a bias medianama.com/2019/02/223-tw…
There had been protests against Twitter outside their Delhi office
There had been protests against Twitter outside their Delhi office
(8/n) 2. Platform power&neutrality:handful of companies controlling "vital avenues for our national discourse under the guise of promoting open forums for debate", while having"blanket immunity when they use their power to censor content and silence viewpoints that they dislike."
(9/n)3. When a platform "removes or restricts access to content and its actions do not meet the criteria of subparagraph (c)(2)(A), it is engaged in editorial conduct", and should be exposed to liability like any traditional editor and publisher.
(10/n) Now Trump has asked for the following action to be taken.
1. "All executive departments and agencies should ensure that their application of section 230(c) properly reflects the narrow purpose of the section and take all appropriate actions in this regard."
This won't +
1. "All executive departments and agencies should ensure that their application of section 230(c) properly reflects the narrow purpose of the section and take all appropriate actions in this regard."
This won't +
(11/n) help him because it's pretty broad provision and the only part that can be challenged is the "good faith" bit. Which will go to court. Which the White House can easily lose.
2. The FCC has been asked to propose regulations to clarify how the two parts (A and B) interact.+
2. The FCC has been asked to propose regulations to clarify how the two parts (A and B) interact.+
(12/n) And the conditions under which an action restricting access to or availability of material is not “taken in good faith”, especially if they are
(A) deceptive, pretextual, or inconsistent with a provider’s terms of service; or
(A) deceptive, pretextual, or inconsistent with a provider’s terms of service; or
(13/n)
(B) taken after failing to provide adequate notice, reasoned explanation, or a meaningful opportunity to be heard.
These are tricky, especially the notice bit. All platforms have automated takedowns and peoples tweets get censored regularly.
(B) taken after failing to provide adequate notice, reasoned explanation, or a meaningful opportunity to be heard.
These are tricky, especially the notice bit. All platforms have automated takedowns and peoples tweets get censored regularly.
(14/n) But that's not going to fly. FCC Commissioner @JRosenworcel (Who is also supportive of net neutrality. Yay!) has already pushed back. docs.fcc.gov/public/attachm…
(15/n) The actual problem is what it signals for platform regulation worldwide. The White House is signaling that it's okay to add further regulations on platforms re how they deal with content. This is especially bad for India. +
(16/n) India is already amending its IT rules to enforce, mainly:
1. Traceability of originators of a message or update.
2. Proactive takedown of content
So this might lead to @rsprasad saying his Ministry is justified in making these amendments
1. Traceability of originators of a message or update.
2. Proactive takedown of content
So this might lead to @rsprasad saying his Ministry is justified in making these amendments
17/17 and we've seen that from him before. When western nations urged facebook to not implement end to end encryption, @rsprasad used that as a justification of his push for traceability in WhatsApp. So, watch this space.
END
(Long thread, I know. Phew.)
END
(Long thread, I know. Phew.)
@threadreaderapp please unroll
Wrote a post on this: linkedin.com/pulse/trumps-e…
