Category: Politics

The morning after protests, communities come together to clean up streets

In the morning after nationwide protests, communities came together to grab trash bags and clean up their streets.

It seems a bit silly to write about sports this morning. Last night protests were held across the country in response to the death of George Floyd, a black man who died after a police officer held his knee on Floyd’s neck for over eight minutes. That officer, Derek Chauvin, has now been arrested on charges of third-degree murder.

Protests were held in Minneapolis, Brooklyn, Washington D.C., Detroit, Boston, Denver, Atlanta, and many more. Most were peaceful; some turned violent. In some cities, property was destroyed, an expression of frustration over a system that feels helplessly broken, and rage with people in power who resist systemic change.

But after these communities expressed that anger and frustration on Friday night, many came together Saturday morning to clean up their neighborhoods.

It’s not new, today. This was from yesterday, in Minneapolis:

(Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

[lawrence-related id=923232]

Trump’s executive order on social media platforms, explained

Understanding the executive order that was sent out about social media platforms.

Welcome to FTW Explains: a guide to catching up on and better understanding stuff going on in the world. This isn’t really a sports story but as denizens of the internet we feel this applies to us, and want to break it down for you. 

On Wednesday evening the White House announced cryptically that they would be releasing a new executive order targeting social media platforms. On Thursday, the order came out, and … it was a bit confusing.

So let’s get to the bottom of the executive order issued by President Donald Trump, which on its surface appears to be an order for agencies to look into the possibility of these companies being held legally responsible for content posted to their platforms, but is much more likely about a personal feud Trump has with Twitter.

Yeah. It’s a lot. Let’s answer your questions.

So, this is embarrassing, but: What’s an executive order?

Not embarrassing at all! Glad you asked. An executive order is a directive issued by the President of the United States. It’s a power given to him by the Constitution as the overseer of the federal government. It’s not quite a law, as it doesn’t have the approval of Congress, but it is enforceable, and can be overturned by a judge.

OK, got it. What’s this particular executive order about?

It’s about social media platforms. Trump claimed the order would be a “big action” and some wondered if he would try to shut down social media platforms for not, in his mind, giving equal treatment to conservative voices (or, more importantly, himself).

It didn’t turn out to be that.

So what is it?

In essence, the order would limit legal protections for social media platforms if they don’t adhere to standards of neutrality.

What are “standards of neutrality?”

Unclear. The order doesn’t really specify. They’re just supposed to be generally fair, to the President, one would sort of have to assume.

Why do these companies need legal protections?

So, this all stems from definitions of “platforms” vs. “publishers.” Social media companies have long maintained that they are platforms, i.e. just a space where free ideas can flow.

This would mean that they are NOT responsible for anything posted on their platform. If they were defined as a “publisher,” it would certainly be different.

Basically: Right now, if someone uses Facebook to, say, libel someone, the person posting could get sued for libel, but not Facebook. Trump’s executive order aimed to weaken those legal protections, by having agencies look at whether platforms could be sued for content posted on their site.

How is that even enforceable?

Basically, it’s not. It’s Trump commanding people to look into something. But it’s pretty clearly a shot across the bow of social media companies, by threatening a legal protection they’ve existed under for their entire existence. If Facebook or Twitter can be sued for anything posted on their platforms, they’d be sued nonstop.

So what’s this actually about?

It sure seems to be about Trump being mad at Twitter. The company made the controversial call this week to start issuing fact checks or labeling warnings on certain tweets from the president. The platform isn’t deleting the tweets, but it is putting notes above them explaining why the President is lying or, in a tweet early Thursday morning, “glorifying violence.”

This ticked off Trump mightily, and shortly thereafter the order came. The executive order mentions Twitter numerous times, despite Facebook and YouTube being larger platforms.

How will this end?

Eh, who knows? Most likely it will be forgotten and moved on from, unless someone in the U.S. government decides to make the case that social media companies can be held legally responsible for the content published to their platforms, in which case, I can’t even wrap my head around the litigation that would happen there.

[jwplayer aabLudiI-q2aasYxh]

Charles Barkley reportedly says ‘I don’t hit women but if I did I would hit you’ to female reporter

There is an unfortunate pattern of behavior for Barkley here, though he insists his comments were made as a joke.

On Tuesday night, Axios reporter Alexi McCammond tweeted out that former NBA star Charles Barkley told her that “I don’t hit women but if I did I would hit you.”

McCammond said Barkley’s comments came after she asked about clarification for which candidate he was supporting in the 2020 Democratic primary.

She says Barkley spoke glowingly about Deval Patrick, but then a member of Pete Buttigieg’s campaign approached the group. When Barkley then said he was a fan of Buttigieg, McCammond pointed out that he had just voiced his support for Patrick. He then made the comment to her.

McCammond also said the comments had been made off the record, an agreement she would normally respect were it not for the nature of those comments.

UPDATE: Barkley has apologized for the comment.

As many online pundits pointed out, Barkley has a troubling history of comments made about violence toward women. Most were couched as jokes, but it’s still a worrying thing that he hasn’t seemed to learn a lesson about this.

McCammond concluded by saying she didn’t like being a part of the story.

“It’s not about me or my feelings,” she tweeted. “But it’s about refusing to allow this culture to perpetuate because of silence on these issues. It’s easier and less awkward to be silent, but that helps NO ONE but the perpetrator.”