A federal judge in California ruled that Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has to go on trial for calling a British cave explorer a "pedophile" and "child rapist,” despite numerous attempts by the tech entrepreneur to have the case dismissed.
Under this new policy, Twitter will no longer accept advertisements that include “content that references a candidate, political party, elected or appointed government official, election, referendum, ballot measure, legislation, regulation, directive, or judicial outcome.” Ads that include appeals to vote or solicitations for financial support will also be banned.
Should social media companies remove posts with the whistleblower's name to protect the person from harm? Facebook and Twitter have different answers.
“I have reconsidered my decision to block Dov Hikind from my Twitter account,” Rep. Ocasio-Cortez said in a statement on Monday. “Mr. Hikind has a First Amendment right to express his views and should not be blocked for them.”
Twitter announced on Wednesday, October 30th that his company would no longer accept political advertising on its platform. While notably more positive than Facebook's reception, Twitter's wasn’t universally warm.
By invoking the United State’s unique commitment to protecting free expression, Zuckerberg sought to draw attention towards the positive aspects of social media.
“We went in thinking we had to prove that the death certificate was real. We ended up having to prove not only that, but that a little baby was born to these two parents,” Pozner’s attorney, Jacob Zimmerman, told First Amendment Watch.
First Amendment Watch, ConSource, and the John Brademas Center at New York University will co-host a panel discussion entitled, “Hate Speech on Social Media: Is There a Way to a More Civil Discussion?”