Intermarkets' Privacy Policy

Donate to Ace of Spades HQ!

Recent Entries
Absent Friends
Bandersnatch 2024
GnuBreed 2024
Captain Hate 2023
moon_over_vermont 2023
westminsterdogshow 2023
Ann Wilson(Empire1) 2022
Dave In Texas 2022
Jesse in D.C. 2022
OregonMuse 2022
redc1c4 2021
Tami 2021
Chavez the Hugo 2020
Ibguy 2020
Rickl 2019
Joffen 2014
AoSHQ Writers Group
A site for members of the Horde to post their stories seeking beta readers, editing help, brainstorming, and story ideas. Also to share links to potential publishing outlets, writing help sites, and videos posting tips to get published. Contact OrangeEnt for info:
maildrop62 at proton dot me
Cutting The Cord And Email Security
Moron Meet-Ups

Quick Hits: Gimped-Out Potato Propagandist Edition | Main | Insurrectionist Cafe: Criminals & Karma Edition
June 07, 2021

Ellie Kemper, Savaged by Twitter Lunatics and Shut-In as a "KKK Princess," Apologizes

Ellie Kemper is an actress -- "Erin" on The Office.

She went to a debutante ball when she was 19.

In 1870, when the debutante ball was first staged, it had discriminatory policies about who would be invited.

Because it was 1870.

Because of this, Twitter has permitted a welter of slander against her, with the SJW cancellers calling her a "KKK Princess," which cannot be legally supported.

It's defamation.

And Twitter not only permitted the defamation, it spotlighted it by making it the subject of a "Twitter Moment" or "Trending" hashtag or whatever.

Thanks to Twitter's spotlighting of defamation against her, she's been forced to bend the knee to the mob:

Screenshot (374).png

She was 19 when she attended the ball, which itself hasn't been racist within her lifetime.

Mediaite makes a good point: These smear campaigns, these SJW scalp-hunting parties, do not just attract national attention organically.

They attract national attention because Twitter -- in a bid to seem "relevant" and to generate clicks and therefore cash -- amplies and promotes these organized defamation campaigns for its own profit.

The article notes that Twitter has had a hand in promoting the left's deplatforming campaigns -- sometimes adding to them with false and therefore defamatory claims that they themselves write, to add what they claim is "context."

This "context" tends to justify the claims made by the Marxist left, and this "context" almost always tends to suggest that the people being scalphunted by Twitter's leftwing Marxist Power Users deserve being scalped.

s. 230 gives Twitter (currently) immunity to what other people write on Twitter, but it's not supposed to give them immunity for their own defamations, tortious interferences with business relationships, and intentional inflictions of emotional harm.

Although there are some leftwing judges who seem to believe it essentially immunizes the Tech Monopolies from literally every lawsuit, and there are many Conservative, Inc. "analysts" who argue that the Tech Monopolies should be immune to suit for their own actions. (Note: this has nothing to do with the Tech Monopolies' donations replacing the donations of disaffected conservatives who no longer give money.)

This is why s.230 has to be repealed and replaced. Even putting aside many people's belief that monopolies should be required to offer content-neutral moderation in exchange for its s.230 protections, it has to be repealed and replaced because the Tech Monopolies keep asserting that it immunizes them against all possible lawsuits involving any aspect of their websites.

And some judges sometimes buy this.

The section is very unclear. Congress' intent is being mangled.

Or is it? Who knows. Maybe Congress really did intend to immunize an entire industry completely from all lawsuits lodged by its users or victims.

That's why we need a clarification about what is and what is not immunized in a social media platform operation.

Should Twitter be free from defamation lawsuits when they're pointing their massive finger at hashtags that are nothing but festering shitholes of slander? Why should they be immune?

Especially given that they can't claim "it's too hard and expensive to closely moderate content." Twitter, Facebook, and Google routinely and eagerly spend lots of money to closely moderate content -- when it's content provided by conservatives.

Does Twitter have no responsibility to moderate obvious defamation, even when they're actively promoting that very defamation?

Are they free to just endlessly profit on defamation that they're promoting for clicks and relevance?

Do they never achieve the status as "publisher," even though it's pretty clear that, by making the editorial decision to spotlight/promote mass defamation, they are in fact publishing that defamation?

Ah, never mind.

The checks must flow.

Protect Google. Protect Twitter. Protect FaceBook. Protect Amazon.

Protect your own paychecks.

All that matters is the hustle. All that counts is the grift.

Update: thanks to Broseidon, here's one of her first appearances, on some College-Humor-style comedy channel, as, um, Crazy Blow-J Girl. Moderate content warning. Pretty amusing.

She is better known as "Erin."

digg this
posted by Ace at 06:30 PM

| Access Comments

Recent Comments
Duncanthrax: "In before any penguins. ..."

enough BS: "That's my take - give the big distraction DEI pats ..."

Eeyore: "I done nooded. ..."

gourmand du jour: "Dang, dat's a big ole lizzard... ..."

Unknown Drip Under Pressure: "[i]I don't know dick about bullets but, would ther ..."

John Drake Has Reached The Sea Of Azov: "May have been mentioned already, but sources are s ..."

eleven: "nood morans ..."

Eeyore: "Nood cafe. ..."

Duncanthrax: "Nood. Café is open. ..."

Last Days of the Republic: "Nood ..."

hart: "But we don't - we do weapons and stuff, but the th ..."

Dash my lace wigs!: "Bring back ALL THE THINGS!!! Posted by: Helena Ha ..."

Recent Entries

Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
Powered by
Movable Type 2.64