Signing an executive order today to stop Twitter or other social media companies from censoring the content of his messages, 73-year-old President Donald Trump pushed back on Twitter for daring to fact-check his tweet about the possibility of mail-in ballots causing widespread voter fraud. “Get the facts about mail-in ballots,” Twitter placed under Trump’s tweets, something rarely done by media platforms. Whether individuals at Twitter or any other social media platform disagree with Trump, fact-checking on social media is entirely inappropriate. Social media platforms are not publishing houses like newspapers to TV news shows, they are platforms for delivering messages. Fact-checking, by definition is an arbitrary process that mirrors the biases of individuals or organizations doing the fact-checking. Today’s controversy over mail-in ballots is not something social media should weigh in on.
Trump used Twitter as an alternative to the mainstream press that disseminates endless negative opinions about Trump’s actions and policies. Harvard’s Shorenstein School in its Kennedy Center for Government found May 19, 2017 that over 90% of Trump’s media coverage is negative. Trump has used Twitter to get out his message and respond to what he calls “fake news” disseminated in mainstream broadcast and print outlets. Trump has 80.4 million followers on Twitter, far more circulation than any American newspaper, including the New York Times with a 443,000 daily customers. “We have today to defend free speech from one of the gravest dangers it has faced in American history, frankly,” Trump said today, signing his executive order. Twitter CEO 43-year-old Jack Dorsey made a big mistake fact-checking Trump’s tweets. Twitter doesn’t give him that right except for dangerous or obscene speech.
Social platforms are supposed to be the one place free of political bias, not with opinions of users, but free of bias from the systems itself. People working for Google, Twitter, Facebook or any other social platforms have prejudice for one thing or another but the system must remain free of contamination. Exceptions to free speech, like hate speech, threats of terrorism, violence, offensive language, deadly recommendations that could harm the health, safety and welfare of users are certainly subject to censorship. Trump complained about Twitter’s claim to fact-checking, when fact-checking is not appropriate for social networking platforms. “I think I’d be hurting it very badly if we didn’t use it anymore,” Trump said, referring to his 80.4 million followers, driving business to Twitter. “We have other sites we can use, I guess, or we’d have to develop other sites,” something unlikely.
Twitter’s CEO 43-year-old Jack Dorsey couldn’t fathom that someone working for his company went rogue “fact-checking” Trump. “This doesn’t make us an ‘arbiter of the truth’” Dorsey tweeted. “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 clear see the why behind our actions,” Dorsey said, exposing Twitter to more liability. No social network platform is in the business to “show information in dispute,” AKA controversy. Dorsey showed as Twitter CEO he doesn’t get the appropriate limits of Twitter’s platform. Once you get into “fact-checking,” it’s ironically a highly subject process determined by personal biases of the persons doing the fact-checking. Dorsey can’t see that the “why behind our actions” is political bias, passing judgment.
Facebook’s 36-year-old CEO Marck Zuckberg, who competes with Twitter as a social network, took a shot a Trump’s favorite social platform. “Private companies probably shouldn’t be, especially these platform companies, shouldn’t be in the position of doing that,” Zuckerberg said, defending Trump. “This would penalize companies that choose to allow controversial speech and encourage platforms to censor anything that may offend anyone,” said Facebook spokesman Andy Stone. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act protects Internet companies from lawsuits about content. Trump’s comments about mail-in ballots were hardly controversial, even if employees of Twitter or any other social networking companies disagree with him. Trump likens what happened at Twitter to FBI employees using their personal prejudice against him to violate his civil rights.
Trump wants Congress of amend Section 230 of the Communications Act to prevent Social networks like Twitter from censoring free speech. Whether Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey knows it or not, he’s got some real problems with rogue employees at his company. When Demsey says putting fact-checking labels on tweets doesn’t make Twitter the “arbiter of truth,’ that’s simply not true.. Anytime someone determines what’s factual and what isn’t when it comes to controversial subjects, it’s entirely arbitrary, not something social network companies should be doing. Trump’s political enemies like House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) would like nothing more than to slap Trump down on Twitter or any other social networking platform. With 4.6 million followers, Pelosi’s green-with-envy over Trump 80.4 million followers, knowing he has more influence than anyone on the Internet.
