♪ ♪
>> Kat: HAPPY THURSDAY, EVERYBODY!
I’M KAT, BUT YOU CAN CALL ME
MS. TIMPF IF YOU’RE NASTY.
[LAUGHTER]
LET’S TALK ABOUT THE
SUPREME COURT, AND A LAW CALLED
SECTION 230.
I KNOW WHAT YOU THINKING.
"KAT, THAT HAS NUMBERS IN IT.
EW, GROSS.
IF I CARED ABOUT TRIPLE DIGIT
NUMBERS, I LOOK AT RATINGS FOR
CNN."
[LAUGHTER]
BUT IF THIS LAW GOES AWAY, IT
COULD DESTROY THE INTERNET AS WE
KNOW IT.
BUT DON’T WORRY, JOEY.
PORN WILL STILL BE AVAILABLE, SO
YOU WON’T LOSE HER SECOND JOB.
GET IT?
YOU THOUGHT I WAS SAYING HE
LIKES PORN, BUT I’M SAYING HE IS
IN PORN.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.
[LAUGHTER]
SO, THIS WEEK THE SUPREME COURT
HEARD TWO CASES FROM FAMILIES
WHO LOST LOVED ONES IN TERRORIST
ATTACKS, AND THOSE FAMILIES ARE
SUING SOCIAL MEDIA COMPANIES,
ALLEGING THEY SHOULD BE HELD
LIABLE FOR HELPING ISIS.
WHEN CASE INVOLVED THE 2015
PARIS ATTACKS.
IT ARGUED THAT YOUTUBE’S
ALGORITHMS RECOMMENDED ISIS
PROPAGANDA TO USERS.
THE OTHER CASE CLAIMED TWITTER
GAVE ISIS ASSISTANCE AND DIDN’T
DO ENOUGH TO POLICE THEM FROM
SHARING CONTENT.
AND THAT IS WHERE SECTION 230
COMES IN.
IT IS A SHORT LAW WRITTEN IN
1996 THAT IS SAID TO HAVE
CREATED THE INTERNET.
IT GOES LIKE THIS: "NO PROVIDER
OR USER OF AN INTERACTIVE
COMPUTER SERVICE SHALL BE
TREATED AS THE PUBLISHER OR
SPEAKER OF ANY INFORMATION
PROVIDED BY ANOTHER INFORMATION
CONTENT PROVIDER."
THOSE WORDS ALLOWED THE INTERNET
TO GROW EXPONENTIALLY OVER THE
PAST 25 YEARS.
BECAUSE SITES LIKE GOOGLE,
TWITTER, YOUTUBE, AND FACEBOOK
COULDN’T BE SUED OVER THE
CONTENT USERS POST ON THEIR
PLATFORMS.
NOW, THAT WAS GREAT FOR ANYONE
WHO LOVED FREE SPEECH, BUT LIKE
WHEN THE PRESIDENT CLIMBED
STAIRS, IT COMES WITH A RISK.
[LAUGHTER]
NOW, OBVIOUSLY, NO ONE WANTS TO
STAND ON THE SIDE OF TERRORISTS.
EVEN IF THE FEAR OF FURTHER
LAWSUITS SENT MARK ZUCKERBERG
FLEEING TO HIS HOME PLANET.
[LAUGHTER]
IMAGINE HOW PISSED OFF HE WOULD
LOOK --
[LAUGHTER]
AND FOR REFERENCE, HERE HE IS
HAVING SEX.
[LAUGHTER]
BUT CHANGING THIS LAW WOULD OPEN
THE DOOR FOR CENSORING THINGS
OTHER THAN TERRORISM, TOO.
AND ONCE THAT DOOR IS OPEN,
IT’LL BE HARDER TO CLOSE AND DON
LEMONS MOUTH.
[LAUGHTER]
THINK ABOUT IT.
IT’S NOT LIKE ISIS CONTENT GETS
THROUGH BECAUSE BIG TECH PEOPLE
LOVE ISIS.
OF COURSE THEY DON’T.
ISIS ISN’T VEGAN.
[LAUGHTER]
AND THEY DON’T WEAR HOODIES TO
WORK.
IT’S BECAUSE COMPANIES CAN’T
CATCH EVERYTHING THAT EVERYONE
IS POSTING ALL OF THE TIME.
OTHERWISE THEY WOULD BE SENDING
A S.W.A.T. TEAM AFTER EVERY
CREEP IN MY COMMENT SECTION.
[LAUGHTER]
CHECK YOUR GRANDFATHERS, PLEASE.
AND WE KNOW, ISIS CONTENT IS NOT
ALWAYS OVERTLY LABELED FOR WHAT
IT REALLY IS.
AND I GET IT, IT’S EASY TO HATE
BIG TECH.
THEY BOPPED AROUND SAN FRANCISCO
DRINKING OAT MILK LATTES AND
ACTING LIKE THEY ARE SO MUCH
BETTER THAN YOU.
WELL, AT LEAST WHEN THEY DO TAKE
A BREAK FROM WHINING ABOUT
HAVING TO COME INTO THE OFFICE.
IF I WANTED TO HEAR PEOPLE BITCH
ABOUT THEIR CUSHY JOBS, I’D HAVE
LUNCH WITH JIMMY FAILLA.
[LAUGHTER]
BUT RECENTLY, BOTH POLITICAL
SIDES HAVE ARGUED IN FAVOR OF
ENDING SECTION 230.
FOR LIBERALS, IT’S ABOUT THE
HATE SPEECH ON THE PLATFORM. OF COURSE, THEIR DEFINITION OF
OF COURSE, THEIR DEFINITION OF
HATE SPEECH IS BROADER THAN A
KARDASHIAN’S ASS.
[LAUGHTER]
FOR CONSERVATIVES IT’S ABOUT
WANTING TO HOLD BIG TECH LIABLE
FOR SILENCING OUR SHADOW BANNING
THEIR VIEWS, LIKE CRAZY
CONFUSING THEORIES ABOUT GROSS
STUFF ON HUNTER BIDEN’S LAPTOP,
WHICH COULD BE TRACED BACK TO
GROSS STUFF ON HUNTER BIDEN’S
LAPTOP.
[LAUGHTER]
BUT ALL OF THE BAD THINGS ABOUT
BIG TECH, AND A DESIRE FOR YOUR
VOICE TO BE HEARD, ARE EXACTLY
WHY YOU SHOULD WANT TO KEEP
SECTION 230.
YOU THINK BIG TECH CENSORSHIP IS
BAD NOW, JUST IMAGINE HOW MANY
MORE THINGS WOULD GET CENSORED
IF THESE PLATFORMS HAD TO WORRY
ABOUT GETTING SUED.
IT WOULD BE LIKE TRYING TO WATCH
THE MOVIE "SCARFACE," IF IT WERE
EDITED BY DANA PERINO.
[LAUGHTER]
IT WOULD BE 10 MINUTES LONG, AND
ABOUT DOGS.
[LAUGHTER]
BOTTOM LINE, THESE PLATFORMS
WOULD BE MOST WORRIED ABOUT
GETTING SUED BY THOSE WITH THE
GREATEST MEANS TO DO SO: THE
POWERFUL.
AND IF COMPANIES LIKE TWITTER
HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THAT, AND
THEY KNOW THAT IT’S BASICALLY
IMPOSSIBLE TO KEEP TRACK OF
EVERYTHING BEING POSTED, DON’T
YOU THINK THEY MIGHT JUST
AUTOMATICALLY DECIDE TO BAN ANY
MENTION OF THOSE PEOPLE AT ALL?
AND WHEN IT COMES TO BAD PRESS,
THE RICH AND POWERFUL CAN BE A
REAL PAIN IN THE ASS.
SO, WITHOUT SECTION 230, I AM
AFRAID THAT THE ABILITY TO SPEAK
TRUTH TO POWER ON THE INTERNET
MIGHT COMPLETELY DISAPPEAR.
ALTHOUGH, I ADMIT, IF [BLEEP]
PICS FROM RANDOS WENT AWAY, I’D
BE VERY HAPPY.
[LAUGHTER]
BUT THAT’S REALLY NOT ABOUT
SPEECH.
AND I AM A FIRM BELIEVER THAT
FREE SPEECH IS GOOD.
THE ANSWER TO SPEECH YOU
DISAGREE WITH IS NEVER TO SHUT
IT DOWN, BUT TO ANSWER WITH YOUR
OWN.
THAT’S WHY I TALK SO MUCH.
I DO IT FOR MY COUNTRY.
[LAUGHTER]
PLUS, BLAMING A SOCIAL MEDIA
SITE FOR WHAT A PERSON POSTS
MAKES ABOUT AS MUCH SENSE AS
BLAMING A GUN FOR WHAT A PERSON
SHOOTS.
IT DIDN’T WORK FOR ALEC BALDWIN, AND IT AIN’T GONNA WORK FOR US!
AND IT AIN’T GONNA WORK FOR US!
[CHEERS AND APPLAUSE]
WELCOME!
TONIGHT’S GUESTS -- HE WAS THE
"HALF" IN "TWO AND A HALF MEN."
HE’S LAUGHING!
JOHNNY JOEY JONES!
[APPLAUSE]
SHE’S NOT ANGRY.
THAT’S JUST HOW SHE TALKS.
COHOST OF "THE FIVE,"
JUDGE JEANINE PIRRO!
[CHEERS AND APPLAUSE]
HE LOOKS LIKE PETER PAN, IF HE
GREW UP TO RUN A HOOKAH BAR.
COMEDIAN HOST OF THE NEW SHOW,
"WHO THE [BLEEP] IS THAT?"
JEFF DYE!
[APPLAUSE]
AND IT TAKES A FOREST TO MAKE
HIS WOODEN CLOGS.
MY SIDEKICK AND HEAVYWEIGHT
CHAMPION, TYRUS.
[CHEERS AND APPLAUSE]
OKAY.
YEAH, I CHOSE THIS MODEL A TOPIC
BECAUSE A LOT OF LIBERALS AND
CONSERVATIVES HATE SECTION 230.
I GUESS I HAVEN’T HAD ENOUGH
PEOPLE YELLING AT ME.
[LAUGHS]
JOEY, DO YOU THINK THERE’S ANY
FACILITY TO THE CONCERN THAT
REPEALING IT WOULD END UP
CENSORING CONSERVATIVES MORE?
>> Joey: SURE, BUT ALSO, LIKE
IF YOU BREAK IT YOU BUY IT,
THAT’S WHERE I LAND ON THIS.
I BELIEVE IN SECTION 230 AND
THAT THE INTERNET SHOULD BE A
PLACE OF FREE SPEECH, BUT YOU
HAVE TO TURN IT BACK AROUND TO
SOCIAL MEDIA COMPANIES AND SAY,
ONCE YOU START CENSORING, YOU
ARE LIABLE FOR CENSORING, SO NOW
YOU ARE CURATING.
I THINK IT’S MORE OF A BLUFF
THAN ANYTHING.
HEY, SOCIAL MEDIA
COMPANIES -- IF YOU WANTED TO BE
FREE SPEECH, LET IT BE
FREE SPEECH AND DON’T EDIT
ANYTHING OFF THERE.
IT’S NOT ONE OF THE OTHER.
IT EITHER HAS TO BE A POST-IT
BOARD OR A CURATED PRESENTATION.
THAT’S THE PROBLEM.
MAYBE THIS ISN’T AS EASY AS A
PARTISAN TALKING POINT, FOR THE
FIRST TIME IN POLITICS IN A
WHILE.
WE HATE TWITTER, BUT WE LIKE
ELON -- WE HATE ELECTRIC CARS,
BUT THEY’RE BUILT IN AMERICA.
THERE IS SOME DUALITY HERE.
MAYBE BIG TECH ISN’T THE WORST,
BUT IT’S ALSO NOT THE BEST.
I THINK THEY HAVE THEIR WORK CUT
OUT FOR THEM.
I THINK SOCIAL MEDIA IS AN
ABSOLUTELY DESTRUCTIVE THING TO
AMERICA, BUT SOCKS DOMINIC FOLKS KNEW WHO I
AM FOX NEWS LAND BECAUSE I HAVE
A TWITTER.
>> Kat: SOCIAL MEDIA WENT
AWAY, HE WOULD HAVE NO IDEA WHAT
TO DO.
>> Tyrus: THE AD.
BOY, THIS IS THE PART WHERE I
TELL YOU GUYS I WAS REALLY HIGH.
[LAUGHTER]
I AGREE.
MAYBE WE COME UP WITH 231 AND WE
ADD A THING, "KNOWINGLY.
CLOSE WITH THE BIGGEST PROBLEM
WITH TWITTER BEFORE ELON BUT IT
IS THAT THEY WERE KNOWINGLY
CENSORING AND DECIDING WHAT WAS
NEWSWORTHY AND WHAT IS NOT DUE
TO FAVOR OF PARTY.
IN THAT CASE, THE PEOPLE WHO DID
THAT SHOULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE.
MAYBE NOT TWITTER ITSELF.
IT’S ALMOST LIKE WITH
POLITICIANS THAT HAVE QUALIFIED
IMMUNITY, WHICH I THINK IS
SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE
ADJUSTED.
IF YOU GO PUSH OUT HATE SPEECH
OR GO AFTER A GROUP BECAUSE YOU
DON’T AGREE WITH THEIR BELIEFS,
YOU SHOULD BE ACCOUNTABLE FOR
THAT.
SO MAYBE YOU DON’T GET TO SUE
TWITTER, BUT THE CEOs WHO SAT
AROUND DECIDING WE DON’T WANT TO
HEAR WHAT JOHNNY JOE HE HAS TO
SAY BECAUSE HE WORKS FOR FOX,
THEY SHOULD BE HELD LIABLE.
LET’S SPLIT THE DIFF, KNOW WHAT
I’M SAYING?
231.
AND I’M SORRY I WAS HIGH.
[APPLAUSE]
>> Kat: JUDGE, YOU ARE A
JUDGE, AND --
>> Jeanine: I GUESS AN ANGRY
ONE!
>> Kat: WHAT JOEY SAYS, THE
LAW DOESN’T ALLOW ANYTHING, SO
THAT’S A GOOD POINT YOU BRING UP
AND A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE SAYING
YOU NEED TO AMEND IT OR ADD
SOMETHING ELSE.
WHAT DO YOU THINK WILL HAPPEN
HERE?
>> Jeanine: THE PROBLEM WITH
SECTION 230 IS THAT IT DOESN’T
PROVIDE PROTECTION FOR CERTAIN
PEOPLE.
LET ME EXPLAIN WHAT I MEAN BY
THAT.
IF YOU ALLOW ANYTHING TO GO ON
THE INTERNET, WHICH IS
FREE SPEECH AT ITS BEST, THE
PROBLEM IS, IF YOU PRIORITIZE
CERTAIN SPEECH, IF YOU ALLOW
CERTAIN SPEECH THAT MAYBE IS
DEFAMATION, OR MAY BE LIABLE,
THE ISSUE IS WHETHER OR NOT YOU
SHOULD BE LIABLE THE WAY A
PUBLISHER IS.
SO THE QUESTION IS, 230 IS A
PLATFORM.
THAT BOOK RIGHT THEY ARE, IF
THERE ARE LIES IN GREG GUTFELD’S
BOOK, YOU COULD SUE THE
PUBLISHER.
>> IT’S THERE ARE.
>> Jeanine: [LAUGHS]
BUT I’M NOT SAYING THAT.
YOU COULD SUE THE PUBLISHER.
I’M NOT SO SURE THAT
SOCIAL MEDIA SHOULD GET AWAY
WITH LETTING ANYTHING ON THE
PLATFORM AND SAY YOU HAVE
NOTHING TO DO THAT, BECAUSE YOU
KNOW EVERYONE HAS A BIAS,
EVERYONE HAS A PARTICULAR AGENDA
AGENDA.
WE FOUND THAT OUT BECAUSE OF
ELON MUSK.
SO I THINK THERE HAS TO BE SOME
REGULATION.
THEY CAN’T, WILLY-NILLY, LET
ANYTHING ON WITHOUT BEING
RESPONSIBLE IN SOME WAY.
SO PEOPLE WHO ARE MAYBE -- THEY
END UP BEING A TERRORIST BECAUSE
THEY LEARNED ABOUT SOMETHING ON
THE INTERNET, MAYBE THE INTERNET
AND THESE PLATFORMS SHOULD BE
MORE CAREFUL ABOUT CERTAIN
THINGS.
I’M NOT SAYING SUPPRESS SPEECH,
BUT RECOGNIZE WHEN SPEECH IS NOT
TRUTHFUL AND WHEN THEY ARE
PRIORITIZING SPEECH AS COMPARED
TO OTHER SPEECH.
[APPLAUSE]
>> Kat: I WOULD JUST LIKE TO
ADD, SAYING DON’T LET ANYTHING
WILLY-NILLY ON COULD BE GOOD
ADVICE AND OTHER AREAS OF LIFE.
[LAUGHTER]
OH!
JEFF, I WANT TO REALLY GET EVEN
HERE BECAUSE YOU ARE WELL
RESPECTED AS THE COUNTRY’S
NUMBER ONE UNITED STATES CODE
COMEDIAN.
>> Jeff: THAT’S TRUE, I’M THE
NUMBER ONE NONTRANS CRUISE SHIP
COMEDIAN IN 2020.
THAT’S A FACT.
[APPLAUSE]
THANK YOU.
I WILL ADMIT WHEN I DON’T KNOW
STUFF.
>> Kat: BY THE WAY, THAT’S A
GOOD THING.
SO MANY PEOPLE DIG THEIR HEELS
AND WITH SOMETHING NOTHING
ABOUT.
>> Jeff: IT’S TOO COMPLEX FOR
ME.
I DON’T UNDERSTAND, I DON’T
KNOW, I DON’T HAVE ANY ANSWERS.
I’M NOT COMPLAINING BUT I ALSO
DON’T HAVE SOLUTIONS FOR IT.
IT SEEMED LIKE A LOT -- I AGREE
WITH THIS, I JUST LIKE THE IDEA
BEFORE I READ IT.
I THOUGHT ISIS HAD A GUY THAT
WAS, LIKE, IN CHARGE OF A
FACEBOOK PAGE.
>> Kat: [LAUGHS]
>> Jeff: A PICTURE A GUY BEING
LIKE, "YOU’RE NOT VERY GOOD AT
THIS, JUST RUN THE SOCIALS."
"YOU’VE BEEN POKED BY ISIS!"
BUT THEN I STARTED TO READ IT
AND I DON’T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT
IT.
SPEW AND IF THEY WERE VERIFIED AS
ISIS --
>> Jeff: TURNS OUT IT’S WAY
MORE COMPLEX AND I READ IT TO
OTHERS.
I REALLY DON’T KNOW ANYTHING
ABOUT THIS ONE.
[APPLAUSE]
>> Tyrus: YOU JUST GOT CHEERED
FOR KNOWING NOTHING.
I GET IT.
BUT I STILL THINK, FREE SPEECH,
YES.
BUT THEIR ON SCONCES FOR WHAT
YOU SAY.
IF YOU WANT TO STAND BY WHAT YOU
SAY, UNDERSTAND THERE ARE
CONSEQUENCES.
WE SEEM TO BE LIVING IN A TIME
WHERE NOBODY WANTS CONSEQUENCES.
THEY JUST WANT THEIR FEELINGS TO
BE FACTS AND NO ONE TO PROTECT
THEM.
SO THERE NEEDS TO BE A CHECK.
>> Jeff: THAT’S A PROBLEM WITH
ANONYMITY ON TWITTER, ALSO.
I CAN JUST MAKE UP A THING AND
SAY A BUNCH OF CRAZY STUFF.
HOW DO YOU HOLD THEM
ACCOUNTABLE?
>> Joey: JUDGE, HE SAID
SOMETHING ABOUT, IF YOU KNOW
IT’S NOT FACT, IF YOU HAVE
FACT-CHECKERS AT ALL, NOW YOU
ARE LIABLE FOR EVERYTHING THAT
ISN’T A FACT THAT YOU DON’T
LABEL NOT A FACT.
THAT’S THE PROBLEM.
IF YOU JUST SAY IT’S ON THERE,
YOU DECIDE IF YOU WANT TO
BELIEVE IT, THAT IS SECTION 230,
RIGHT?
BUT ONCE YOU START SAYING IT’S
NOT TRUE, BUT THIS MIGHT BE
TRUE --
>> Jeanine: HOW ABOUT CHILD PORNOGRAPHY CONNECT THAT’S EASY
THERE HAS TO BE SOME
ACCOUNTABILITY, SOME
RESPONSIBILITY, AND INCITING
RIOTS, CHILD PORNOGRAPHY, ALL
KINDS OF DEFAMATION.
AS YOU SAY, YOU DON’T KNOW WHO’S
SAYING IT, BUT IF YOU ALLOW
THIS, KNOWINGLY ALLOW IT -- AND
WE KNOW IT FROM ELON MUSK AND
FROM TWITTER, IF YOU ALLOW THIS
KIND OF THING TO PROLIFERATE,
THEN THERE ARE CONSEQUENCES.
>> Kat: WE DO HAVE TO GO TO
BREAK, BUT YOU GUYS ARE ALL
INVITED TO COME OVER TO MY
APARTMENT LATER AND WE CAN