Big Tech Companies in the US Have Been Told Not to Apply the Digital Services Act (www.wired.com)

submitted 5 days ago by floofloof@lemmy.ca to c/politics@lemmy.world

7 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 7 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 17 points 5 days ago

Online platforms have become central to public debate, and the pervasive online censorship in recent years has outraged the American people. Not only have Americans been censored and banned from platforms for expressing opinions and beliefs not shared by a small Silicon Valley elite, but the previous administration actively worked to encourage such censorship.

LOL, a lot of utter bullshit piped straight from Bullshit Mountain there, but the funny thing is, the same "small Silicon Valley elite" helped propagate epic amounts of right wing bullshit and their algorithms throw people down a rabbit hole of white supremacy and conspiracy theories and they did next to nothing to counter any of that.

In addition, that same elite helped to fund Taco.

Lastly, I haven't seen one conservative really deplatformed or "censored" to any extent that actually mattered....but these people will have their panties in a bunch over this same perceived slight just like they are about vaccine and mask mandates, because conservatives are whiny-ass babies.

FFS.

[-] Mr_WorldlyWiseman 4 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

The funny thing is that the DSA explicitly protects citizens' free speech on internet platforms. You know, the whole thing that was conservatives' #1 issue when it came to digital policy?

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago

I think the average con has little idea of what they actually want.

At one point, the con base were trained to parrot a bunch of stuff about Section 230 because "freedom" and they think they are being silenced and they believe that cons should have the right to not only be able to spew anything on private platforms, but that their content should be prioritized to be blasted into others' faces even if no one wants to see that content...

So I haven't tracked their fee fees on DSA, but I wonder if it is just as whiny and contradictory as their feelings about Section 230...I imagine they think things should be gamed so that cons get to say whatever they want and liberals have to read it.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 9 points 5 days ago

JFC, every stupid fucking grievance from the unhinged right wing is being addressed by this shitstain of an administration.

[-] xyzzy@lemmy.today 8 points 5 days ago

In practice this guidance is meaningless. If these companies flout laws, they'll be fined or blocked entirely. They also don't want the complexity of two different ways of doing the same thing. So, you know, they'll comply.

[-] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 3 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Yes and no. Parts of the apparatus that are still functioning will try to. And then I’m sure the fascists will roll the penalties back or some shit.

Edit: I’m dumb; this is the US telling companies to ignore EU law. This will almost certainly lead to an even harder split between the US and EU. I hope the EU does not capitulate, because to do so would frankly be jaw-droppingly short-sighted in a strategic and geopolitical sense.

[-] xyzzy@lemmy.today 2 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

What does "roll the penalties back" mean exactly? The US doesn't have jurisdiction over Europe. These companies operate in Europe based on their compliance with the law.

this post was submitted on 01 Sep 2025

67 points (100.0% liked)

politics

25529 readers

1841 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News