To the surprise of no one, state senator Ruben Diaz Sr. has come out in full force against the bi-partisan committee looking into how to deal with Hiram Monserrate. In a statement released earlier today, Diaz questioned the impartiality of Democratic conference leader John Sampson and any and all Republicans, while also noting the blatant absence of any Hispanic senators on the committee. Diaz concludes that the committee is only out to “settle the score” with Monserrate over the Senate coup he took part in. Which is probably kind of true! Meanwhile, Monserrate’s allies are claiming that the committee lacks jurisdiction because the crime in question took place before he was a member of the State Senate. That’s a pretty weak argument he was just found guilty of misdemeanor assault last week, remember? but then again, Monserrate has been surprisingly successful with weak arguments so far.
[Facebook’s rationale for leaving up the Pelosi video] is ridiculous. The only thing the incident shows is how expert Facebook has become at blurring the lines between simple mistakes and deliberate deception, thereby abrogating its responsibility as the key distributor of news on the planet.
Would a broadcast network air this? Never. Would a newspaper publish it? Not without serious repercussions. Would a marketing campaign like this ever pass muster? False advertising.
No other media could get away with spreading anything like this because they lack the immunity protection that Facebook and other tech companies enjoy under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Section 230 was intended to spur innovation and encourage start-ups. Now it’s a shield to protect behemoths from any sensible rules. …
By conflating censorship with the responsible maintenance of its platforms, and by providing “rules” that are really just capricious decisions by a small coterie of the rich and powerful, Facebook and others have created a free-for-all with no consistent philosophy.