Just As #DiaperDon Starts Trending, Trump Claims That Twitter Uses 'Fake' Trends, Calls For 'Termination' Of Section 230
from the for-national-security? dept
It's no secret that Donald Trump doesn't like Section 230. Wait. Actually, let's back up and try that again: it's no secret that Donald Trump doesn't like what he thinks Section 230 is about, which has little-to-no-resemblance to what Section 230 is actually about. However, over the long weekend, things took an even more ridiculous turn than usual. It started on Thanksgiving when the President was signing some legislation and taking some questions from the press. For unclear reasons, the setup where he had to sign things was with a very small desk affixed with the Presidential seal. While this desk has been used before for such things -- and Trump has even joked about the size of it, the framing of the shot -- the lack of people around him, the wide frame of the shot, the tread over carpet, and just... everything really made it look like the President was sitting at an elementary school desk.
The internet started to have some fun. Actually, lots of fun.
#BlackFridayDeals special My Little President Conference Table avaliable now in all good stores $19.99 *please note product easy wipe clean in case of Little President accidents #DiaperDon pic.twitter.com/XtS3dAPS6X
— Charlie Hayes (@oxfcharlie) November 27, 2020
Someone had to sit at the little kids table this year for thanksgiving #diaperdon pic.twitter.com/pDKAEp61dW
— Mike (@kingfloorfan) November 27, 2020
Who did this? pic.twitter.com/gHN0qMBUcA
— Jennifer Harris (@jwharris) November 27, 2020
#massivedumps #DiaperDonnie the new poster boy for Depends pic.twitter.com/2teYqhhYt3
— DogLearnsToTweet2020🌊 #ByeDon🌊 #Resist🌊#BLM (@Kim63727785) November 29, 2020
So, @realDonaldTrump, did your staff pick out your play set for your photo op from an abandoned #KidsRUs store? #LOSER #DiaperDon pic.twitter.com/prhVIbdITQ
— John B. Pierce (@JohnBPierce1) November 30, 2020
Favorite meme of the day 😂👶🏻#DiaperDon pic.twitter.com/FLKCWCCWEj
— Colin Anderson (@colin_thinks) November 30, 2020
It was not long until #DiaperDonald started trending on Twitter.
And, then, it was not much longer beforel the Commander-in-Chief of the military, and the leader of the United Stated of America decided to throw a tantrum on Twitter and claim that Twitter made up its trending topics (it does not).
That's the supposed leader of the free world saying:
Twitter is sending out totally false "Trends" that have absolutely nothing to do with what is really trending in the world. They make it up, and only negative "stuff". Same thing will happen to Twitter as is happening to @FoxNews daytime. Also, big Conservative discrimination!
All of that is, of course, nonsense, but it was followed up just five minutes later with:
That's him saying:
For purposes of National Security, Section 230 must be immediately terminated!!!
The fact that this comes so close to the tweet whining about #DiaperDon trending suggests that this has literally nothing to do with "national security." If Trump has learned one thing while he's in office, it's that one way that the President can actually get stuff done (such as start trade wars) without the need to get Congress's approval is to claim "national security" to make it happen. But you can't just get rid of laws that way. That's not how any of this works. At all.
Also, um, if Section 230 was terminated, it wouldn't change the fact that Twitter might show trending topics that are critical of the President. Because that's protected by the 1st Amendment. You know... part of the Constitution that the President swore to protect and uphold when he was sworn into office?
Of course, if 230 were terminated, meaning that Twitter (and others) might face more annoying and costly lawsuits for the actions of its users, one thing it might be a lot more prone to do is to delete the account of troublemakers spewing conspiracy theories and nonsense on its platform. Such as the soon-to-be-leaving President Donald Trump.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: diaper don, donald trump, intermediary liability, national security, section 230, temper tantrum, trending, trends
Companies: twitter
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
A time will come -- not right away, not all at once, but hopefully within the next year -- when each of us manages to go a full day without thinking about Donald Trump.
That's a happy thought to hold onto.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
How dare you threaten me with a good time.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
More likely time will be spent cursing him, as all the damage he has done is slowly unwound. Indeed it may take time to remove all those he has appointed so that the agencies listen to Joe, rather than Donald.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Daiper?
Learn to spell
[ link to this | view in thread ]
when my local paper mentioned both of 45's tweets, they didn't mention the background. now i know. he and his pals should be shipped off to Lower Elbonia.
this was hilarious: " #BlackFridayDeals special My Little President Conference Table avaliable now in all good stores $19.99 *please note product easy wipe clean in case of Little President accidents #DiaperDon pic.twitter.com/XtS3dAPS6X"
— Charlie Hayes (@oxfcharlie) November 27, 2020[ link to this | view in thread ]
Twitter could hold a lottery with 1st prize the honour of pressing the ban key on @realdonaldtrump
They could make enough money from that to cover the loss of Trump associated advertising!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Daiper?
Learn to punctuate.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Trending blacklist
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The own-goals and well-earned mockery just writes itself...
'It's utterly impossible that people would think I'm so childish that #DiaperDonald would be trending naturally, I will now demonstrate how wildly unrealistic that is by throwing yet another tantrum in front of the entire world!'
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
Tho Joe Biden did say he also wanted the termination of Section 230 (but it may backtrack on that)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Twitter probably wants to avoid having certain kinds of objectionable content popping up in the Trending sidebar. Would you prefer they didn’t?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
The issue here is that Twitter is the one deciding what's objectionable. That's fine, it's their platform and all that, but without more transparency, I wouldn't put much trust in it to be entirely representative.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
Insanely enough this is a case where you can probably trust greed to keep them from going too overboard, as their first and foremost concern is going to be 'will blocking X cause us to lose more money than having it around would gain us?', such that barring some mistakes most moderation of that sort is going to be aimed at keeping things decent and enjoyable for a majority of users.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
representative of what? The only thing it should be representative of is what twitter decided it wants to be on their platform, then people get to decide if they like the results or if they want to go off to parler or whatever
[ link to this | view in thread ]
IF you dont like the way a service works dont use it, or use another app.
the reason he uses twitter is its has millions of users , its easy to use and well designed .
Another company can make a micro blogging service and launch it,
twitter the network effect , it alot of users ,its used by most journalists,writers and bloggers , erasing section 230 would make it more lieklt that twitter would block conservative users epecially users like trump who tweet out content that could be viewed as racist and insulting to minority groups .
is ironic that conservatives are the one s in a hurry to ban section 230
the law that is the main shield for free speech around the world ,
even repressive states would be reluctant to ban twitter since its use by
government and politicans to speak to citizens in most free countrys .
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Trump's child-like logic:
"I am the President of the United States, who won re-election by a lot, and seeing that #DiaperDon is trending on Twitter is making me feel insecure. Therefore, Twitter is a threat to our national security! And if Twitter makes me feel insecure, I'll remove their security blanket, too. Bye-bye, Section 230. It's only fair!"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Daiper?
I made a typo.
There are friendly ways to point out typos and asshole ways.
Which one did you choose?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Failure coming.
Oh! the fun is about to start.
Something Trump, started was a tax savings for the rich and poor, and that Changes in 2021. And its a Payback of the saving(supposedly) we had for the last few years.
But, who gets the blame?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Daiper?
Given that this is a Daiper joke, and given the natural product of an asshole, which way do you think he chose?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Trump's child-like logic:
and he thinks everyone owes him fealty.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
$35 000 per vote
I think #DiaperDon is still smarting after paying $35 000 per newly found vote for Biden in the Wisconsin re-count. #3Mill #87Votes
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: $35 000 per vote
... what?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: $35 000 per vote
Probably referring to this story:
Biden Gains 87 Net Votes In Partial Wisconsin Recount Requested By Trump
In essence, Trump campaign paid $3 mil for Biden to gain 87 votes, or, as the OP put it, ~$35,000 per lost vote.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: $35 000 per vote
Oh that is just too good, whether court rulings or recounts it seems they just cannot stop faceplanting time and time and time again...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
"I wouldn't put much trust in it to be entirely representative."
I wouldn't put much trust into anyone who believes that the Twitter trending screen means much of anything at all. Sure, it's useful if you're in marketing and you want to see if your new ad campaign is getting bites, but it's not useful for anything of real meaning.
The big problem we have today is not that social media uses algorithms to promote certain content, it's that people blindly accept the results of that algorithm as some kind of truth.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
"Twitter is sending out totally false "Trends" that have absolutely nothing to do with what is really trending in the world."
No, it has nothing to do with what's happening in your world. This is what happens when you build your own fantasy world around you, where you can openly insult the military and people your decisions have killed as losers, where the stock market spiking slightly is the actual economy and the millions you have caused to become unemployed don't matter, where ranting on twitter and Fox/OANN is more important than attending security briefings. Your bubble is not the real world, the real world is full of people laughing at you, praying that you don't destroy too much on your way out of the door.
"For purposes of National Security, Section 230 must be immediately terminated!!!"
Sorry, the bruising of your ego isn't a national security issue just because some social media platform accidentally exposed you to the real world. That wasn't true when TikTok users embarrassed you so hilariously, nor is it here.
What's amusing here is that you think that your ego would be safe if section 230 wasn't there. No, Donny, the result would be that instead of having to mark every Tweet of yours as the dangerous lie that it is, Twitter would finally have to kick you off the platform to avoid the legal liability you just handed to them for continuing to host your words.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
And to pay for security for that person because of the hordes of 2A "patriot" terrorists?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Please do not confuse the Bundeskanzlerin with your chief narcissist.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: $35 000 per vote
It's a little harder to sustain the schadenfreude if you know that they've gotten $150 million in contributions. Their court cases aren't working, but their fundraising scam is.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: $35 000 per vote
That's the whole point. Keep the court cases going while begging for donations, the majority of which do not go to the defense fund--but into his own leadership PAC. Trump's whole carreer has been just one big grift. Any success is just happenstance and not needed for the grift to be profitable.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
"he and his pals should be shipped off to Lower Elbonia."
Already checked. They've proactively refused any presumptive Visa application for the "amerikanski él presidente" with the reason given that they would not trust him around their beautiful pigs or their rich natural reserves of mud.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
"...but without more transparency, I wouldn't put much trust in it to be entirely representative."
People keep saying that and I don't understand why!
"Social media" aren't representative of anything other than the social media themselves. Twitter, Facebook, Parler, Gab...are all nothing more and nothing less than the digital equivalent of the gossip monger you find in every small town, writ large.
That's why the whole debate around them is ridiculous from start to end. It's not a secret that anything you hear and see on twitter, parler, gab or FB is, at best, hearsay and rumor. Only if a link to a credible source backs the assertion should you give any random twitter the credibility you'd give to the gossipy old lady in your neighborhood who won't stop sharing the latest juicy clickbait...err, scuttlebutt.
Yet all too many benighted morons don't bother to factcheck and instead instantly believe whatever random tweet flies across their screen without a single stop to verify the sensationalist gossip is founded in anything other than opinion or hearsay.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: The own-goals and well-earned mockery just writes itself...
"I will now demonstrate how wildly unrealistic that is by throwing yet another tantrum in front of the entire world!'"
It would be an eye-opener that the CiC is such a man-child he can't respond to mean words and satire with anything other than a wild tantrum, complete with triple exclamation marks, and an attempt to shut the Bad People up by invoking national security...
...if we didn't already know that The Donald handles disappointment and criticism like his cartoon namesake - by flailing his fists and quacking angrily.
"I'm not a big baby! I'm Not!! WaaaaaHH!!! Mommy!!!"
Very Dignified.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
"Sorry, the bruising of your ego isn't a national security issue just because some social media platform accidentally exposed you to the real world."
To be fair; Bruising the ego of an entitled man-child with self-esteem issues and an ego more fragile than carnival glass could be argued to have national security consequences if the big baby in question totes the nuclear football around, has a hotline to Moscow and Beijing, and can sign executive orders.
We, uh, may want to let the toddler-in-chief scream and flail his pooper-scooper around until he's tired and wants a nap rather than give him ideas of hammering Big Red Buttons to get rid of all the nasty meanies calling him names.
[ link to this | view in thread ]