WATCH: Dinesh D'Souza discusses how Trump is suing various Big Tech companies over censorship and can win

Conservative author filmmaker and podcaster Dinesh D'Souza spoke on Monday about how Trump's new lawsuits against Big Tech companies like Facebook and Twitter do have ample grounds to prosper and win in court:


Conservative author filmmaker and podcaster Dinesh D'Souza spoke on Monday about Trump's new lawsuits against Big Tech companies like Facebook and Twitter has ample grounds to win in court. "Big news today: Trump announces massive lawsuits against digital media censors, Twitter and Facebook. "

"And of course, some people say right away, and foolishly, 'Oh, Trump can't do that. These platforms have Section 230 protection, Dinesh.' Well, Section 230 protection only immunizes these social media platforms from being sued over content that is allowed on those platforms."

"So, if somebody, for example, libels me on Facebook, I can file a lawsuit against them but I can't sue Facebook for allowing that content to appear. That's what Section 230 protection means. But it doesn't mean that Twitter is protected, for example, for statements, let's say libelous statements, made by Twitter. Trump can certainly sue Twitter over that."

"It also doesn't mean that Twitter can't be sued, or Facebook, for violations of their contract with users. When you sign up for these platforms, there is a mutual contract, and Twitter and Facebook are bound by the terms of the contract as we are, as users.

".... The Trump lawsuit needs to be seen in the wider context of pushback, I would say global pushback, against social media censorship in general, but Twitter in particular," continues D'Souza, mentioning international cases in countries such as India and Nigeria. In fact, the Nigerian government famously suspended Twitter from the country after the platform deleted a post by the Nigerian president.

Dinesh goes on to point out how Big Tech is essentially interfering with the democratic process when they censor heads of state in such a manner:

"So, even in the US, when Trump was banned on these platforms, I don't think people grasp the full significance of the ban, because we have a two-party system. And think about it: these platforms all say 'we're promoting democratic debate', and then you ban, permanently, the leader of one of the two parties."  

"What does that mean? That basically means you are allowing only one party to have its say. How is that different from what happens with digital censorship in places like North Korea, which is a one-party state, or China, which is a one-party state?"

"So, there are chilling global ramifications here."


Join and support independent free thinkers!

We’re independent and can’t be cancelled. The establishment media is increasingly dedicated to divisive cancel culture, corporate wokeism, and political correctness, all while covering up corruption from the corridors of power. The need for fact-based journalism and thoughtful analysis has never been greater. When you support The Post Millennial, you support freedom of the press at a time when it's under direct attack. Join the ranks of independent, free thinkers by supporting us today for as little as $1.

Support The Post Millennial

Remind me next month

To find out what personal data we collect and how we use it, please visit our Privacy Policy

By signing up you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy
© 2024 The Post Millennial, Privacy Policy | Do Not Sell My Personal Information