Sfdebris.net

Both houses of Florida's Republican-controlled legislature have passed new legislation banning social media companies from deplatforming political candidates or censoring large journalistic organizations. Gov. Ron DeSantis has expressed support for the bill and is expected to sign it into law.

But at least one company won't have to worry about the legislation: Disney. A last-minute amendment to the bill provides that it doesn't apply to a "company that owns and operates a theme park or entertainment complex".

Ars Technica Article

Who's up for a ride down to the Google Ball Pit? Or the Facebook Splash Pad? Or perhaps the Twitter Bouncy Castle?

TGLS wrote: ↑Mon May 31, 2021 4:06 pm

Both houses of Florida's Republican-controlled legislature have passed new legislation banning social media companies from deplatforming political candidates or censoring large journalistic organizations. Gov. Ron DeSantis has expressed support for the bill and is expected to sign it into law.

But at least one company won't have to worry about the legislation: Disney. A last-minute amendment to the bill provides that it doesn't apply to a "company that owns and operates a theme park or entertainment complex".

Ars Technica Article

Who's up for a ride down to the Google Ball Pit? Or the Facebook Splash Pad? Or perhaps the Twitter Bouncy Castle?

How about the DeviantArt Exhibition. I hear the newest pieces are spellbinding...

I miss when corruption was wearing a fig leaf instead of being naked.

Oof.
Okay the Disney thing is trivial for Disney as they point out the monetary requirement is trivial for them. Then the comparison in Facebook makes it sound like 1984. Political speech must be heard before all else regardless of your desires.
So my questions come in reverse order.
When do they compel everyone to watch/read political output as a priority? Freedom of speech as I know it has you can say what you want. But I don't have to listen to you. Shoving something front and center is already impinging on that.
And how is this not gelded out the gate by the amendment? Not Disney is corrupt, but the amendment as presented does not say 'in Florida'. It says they have to have one and make a threshold of money. I have seen an apartment 'complex' be one relatively small building. So Facebook has a complex and makes a ton of money. Does this not mean they are now exempt as well? The major news carriers also have building complexes and make a pile of money. Not sure but betting Twitter can qualify as well. So who does this affect, my local newspaper?

Fuzzy Necromancer wrote: ↑Tue Jun 01, 2021 1:09 am I miss when corruption was wearing a fig leaf instead of being naked.

No joke. I'm still undecided about which (if either) can be said to be worse, but any illusions I had that naked, unapologetic corruption would be denounced rather than embraced have gone out the window.

How did the lettering implicate Disney without the exception anyway? What does Disney have to do with Social Media news platforming? Like I don't get how excluding Disney effects a difference in the first place.

Disney plus I guess? I mean that's a streaming service, not a social network, so maybe the Gina Carano thing informed wouldn't penalize Disney so Florida would keep that DisneyWorld money.

Maybe we're going to find out that Disney is buying out Tiktok or something similarly nightmarish. After all, corrupt state legislators hear about that kind of stuff before we do. *nervous laughter*

Beelzquill wrote: ↑Wed Jun 02, 2021 4:18 am Disney plus I guess?

Yeah it's Disney+ related:

In a Friday interview, Republican state Rep. Blaise Ingoglia, a bill sponsor, said the exemption was passed to make sure that the Disney+ streaming service "isn't caught up in this."

I honestly wonder if the legislators know the difference between a streaming service and a social network.

Fuzzy Necromancer wrote: ↑Wed Jun 02, 2021 7:15 am Maybe we're going to find out that Disney is buying out Tiktok or something similarly nightmarish.

Yeah, it'd be horrible for Disney to seize the supply of America's vast supplies of gyrating teenagers. I can't imagine a worse owner, except perhaps a company directly supporting a communist dictatorship's efforts to commit genocide.

I doubt Disney would ever touch social media though -- let alone politics lol.