Brendan Carr

@BrendanCarrFCC ↗

Deleted No

Hibernated No

Last Checked Aug. 26, 2020

Created

Wed Jul 08 00:38:26 +0000 2020

Likes

Retweets

Source

Twitter for iPhone

View Raw Data

JSON Data

View on Twitter

Likely Available

Brendan Carr @BrendanCarrFCC

@mmasnick I’ve been clear that all persons have 1A rights that cannot be infringed. Section 230 confers on one set of speakers (ICSs) statutory protections that go above & beyond those 1A rights that all others have. So those statutory rights can be reformed w/o violating the 1A. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted July 8, 2020

Preceded By

Brendan Carr @BrendanCarrFCC

@mmasnick Big if true! Of course, it’s not. I have not said that a website should lose First Amendment protections. You’re conflating Section 230 with the First Amendment. There is no First Amendment right to Section 230. So Section 230 can be reformed without infringing any 1A rights. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted July 8, 2020

Followed By

Brendan Carr @BrendanCarrFCC

@AtlantaLiberal @mmasnick Some have the view that 230 was a deal — act like a platform (and get 230 protections) or act like a publisher (and don’t). That view isn’t right. 230’s text basically eliminates the platform - publisher distinction and says, in (c)(2), good faith conduct gets 230 protections. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted July 8, 2020