Laserfiche WebLink
A. - Page 11 of 14 <br />uestions to Consider: <br />Many cities obviously believe that creating civil liability for social media platforms—due to their <br />role in providing the connnunication mediums for those who organize looting attacks— is key to <br />deterring this organized criminal activity. <br />If such a change was actually passed by Congress, it would force social media to essentially <br />police every conversation on stakeholders' respective platforms, putting immense pressure on the <br />industry to make subjective determinations about what conversations are appropriate and what <br />are unacceptable. <br />At the end of the day, there are a few questions to consider in assessing this proposed resolution: <br />1) What would this resolution's impact be on free speech and government censorship? <br />2) What are the expectations for cities when they receive information from a social media <br />platform about a potentially credible threat in their respective communities? Does a city <br />become liable for having information from a social media platform and the threat <br />occurs? <br />3) What would the costs be to develop and maintain new data governance policies, <br />including data infrastructure, to store this information? <br />4) What is the role of the League in engaging in issues relating to someone's privacy? <br />SuAport• <br />The following letters of concurrence were received: <br />City of Hawaiian Gardens <br />City of Lakewood <br />City of Ontario <br />City of Rancho Cucamonga <br />City of Roseville <br />13 <br />147 <br />