It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
by Judith Bergman
October 21, 2017 at 5:00 am
Germany has made no secret of its desire to see its new law copied by the rest of the EU.
When employees of social media companies are appointed as the state's private thought police and given the power to shape the form of current political and cultural discourse by deciding who shall be allowed to speak and what to say, and who shall be shut down, free speech becomes nothing more than a fairy tale. Or is that perhaps the point?
Perhaps fighting "Islamophobia" is now a higher priority than fighting terrorism?
A new German law introducing state censorship on social media platforms came into effect on October 1, 2017. The new law requires social media platforms, such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, to censor their users on behalf of the German state. Social media companies are obliged to delete or block any online "criminal offenses" such as libel, slander, defamation or incitement, within 24 hours of receipt of a user complaint -- regardless of whether or the content is accurate or not. Social media companies receive seven days for more complicated cases. If they fail to do so, the German government can fine them up to 50 million euros for failing to comply with the law.
This state censorship makes free speech subject to the arbitrary decisions of corporate entities that are likely to censor more than absolutely necessary, rather than risk a crushing fine. When employees of social media companies are appointed as the state's private thought police and given the power to shape the form of current political and cultural discourse by deciding who shall be allowed to speak and what to say, and who shall be shut down, free speech becomes nothing more than a fairy tale. Or is that perhaps the point?
...
Drudge, Facebook, NYT readers could face libel suits for sharing 'fake news'-New Proposal To FEC
www.abovetopsecret.com...
such as libel, slander, defamation or incitement, within 24 hours of receipt of a user complaint -- regardless of whether or the content is accurate or not.
Libel, slander and defamation are by definition inaccurate.
originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: ElectricUniverse
Did Germany even have an official policy or constitutional right to free speech in the first place???
I'm not familiar with the way Germany handles speech issues personally.
originally posted by: Metallicus
That is why America's founding fathers were incredibly wise.
You can see what happens in a Europe that isn't protected by the Bill of Rights.
No freedom of speech, no guns and no protection.
originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: ElectricUniverse
Did Germany even have an official policy or constitutional right to free speech in the first place???
I'm not familiar with the way Germany handles speech issues personally.
originally posted by: EA006
originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: ElectricUniverse
Did Germany even have an official policy or constitutional right to free speech in the first place???
I'm not familiar with the way Germany handles speech issues personally.
Fight club rules.
originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: audubon
So basically as long as they give good reason and have good intent for this, whether or not that's actually true, they would still totally be within their legal power to censor these things without much anyone can do about it then, right??
originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: audubon
So you're saying it's nothing more than defamation of character/libel law stuff then???
Wasn't that already illegal though??