Facebook, Google, Twitter To Face US Lawmakers About Tech 'Censorship' (cnet.com)
Facebook, Google and Twitter are headed back to Washington next week to testify at a congressional hearing about alleged tech censorship. From a report: Tech companies have faced accusations that they're censoring conservative speech on their platforms. The companies have denied the allegations in the past. The hearing before the Senate Judiciary's subcommittee on the Constitution is scheduled for April 10 and is titled "Stifling Free Speech: Technological Censorship and the Public Discourse." A Facebook spokesperson said Neil Potts, its public policy director, will be testifying. Twitter and Google didn't immediately respond to a request for comment. A source familiar with the Senate hearing said Twitter and Google officials will also be attending. The hearing will likely mark Potts' second congressional appearance next week. Facebook and Google officials are expected to appear before the House Judiciary Committee on April 9 to answer questions about the spread of white nationalism on their platforms.
The problem is, they are either a platform or a publisher.
The difference is in responsibility. If they are a platform, then they have a wide range of latitude on content on that platform. They aren't responsible. The moment they start picking an choosing, they start to become a publisher, and the content protection narrows substantially.
Censorship is a natural tendency, and we all ought to fight against it in all its forms. The idea that some ideas are just "too dangerous" is a slippery slope that we don't want to ride down.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
here we go again.
Just because one has a right to express one's opinion in this country doesn't mean that any corporation has the obligation to carry/post/air your opinion on the platform they own.
Google/Facebook/Twitter all want freedom from any liability for what gets posted on THEIR sites.
They got that from the government in return for ensuring freedom of speech on their sites.
If they don't want to support true freedom of speech, let them be liable for everything posted.
The problem is, they are either a platform or a publisher.
Yep, and that is what Congress is grilling them about - why should they remain classified as a platform when they are heavily shaping the views being published? As it stands Twitter is at this point just a really terrible newspaper.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I'm not sure that "well established", when it comes to electronic communications, is quite accurate.
Check out Manhattan Community Access Corp. v. Halleck and Cyber Promotions v. America Online. At the moment, I think it would be more accurate to say "unclear".
So here is an example. When the Covington Kids scandal broke and people were still being fed only one side of the story, several prominent leftists came out asking to dox the kids and post their addresses and names, stating that their faces were "punchable", and asking to confront the kids at every opportunity. This includes Kathy Griffin, and several prominent journalists.