Yet, companies like Facebook started to assert the right to monitor those exchanges and decide if it approves of the views or representations being made. Users of Twitter and Facebook state a desire to hear the views of other individuals or groups. This was particularly the case with social media. There was a time when the assumption was that the Internet is a forum for largely unimpeded free speech. I have long described myself as an Internet Originalist. It is similar to the benign dictator pitch where a government argues that, despite authoritarian powers, it uses such powers in a benign and tolerant fashion. at least until the company decides that they are ready for such exposure.įacebook’s announcement is meant to assure that it will not abuse its power as the overseer of any political or social discussions. Trump remains too harmful for Facebook users to hear. ![]() Even Trump’s voice has been banned by Facebook. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) have criticized as a danger to free speech. It is safer for them to have these members and these companies determine what they can hear or discuss.įacebook’s decision to allow people to discuss the theory follows the company’s Oversight Board upholding a ban on any postings of Trump, a move that even figures like Germany Angela Merkel and Sen. In all of these exchanges, the underlying portrayal of the public is the same: they are unwitting dupes who must be protected from harmful thoughts or influences. The members stressed that “not all TV news sources are the same” and called these companies to account for their role in allowing such “dissemination.” Thus, it is not just specific stories but whole sources of information that need to be banned to protect innocent, gullible citizens. Indeed, last year, House Democrats Anna Eshoo and Jerry McNerney of California wrote a letter to cable carriers like AT&T to ask why they are still allowing people to watch Fox News. This censorship craze is not just limited to the lab story or to Facebook. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) warned Big Tech CEOs that he and his colleagues were watching to be sure there was no “backsliding or retrenching” from “ robust content modification.” This reframing of expectations has been fostered by Democratic leaders who have pushed social media companies for more censorship to protect people from errant or damaging ideas. I previously wrote about how Facebook is running a campaign to convince young people to accept “content modification” as part of their evolution with technology. Putting aside the lack of a basis for the earlier ban, the statement reflects that assumption that, of course, Facebook should be the arbiter of what can be discussed by users. We’re continuing to work with health experts to keep pace with the evolving nature of the pandemic and regularly update our policies as new facts and trends emerge.” ![]() “In light of ongoing investigations into the origin of COVID-19 and in consultation with public health experts, we will no longer remove the claim that COVID-19 is man-made from our apps. Many (including Fauci) maintain that natural evolution is still the most likely explanation but the lab could be the original source for the outbreak. ![]() While the theory was not proven, it was never disproven. It was ridiculed at the time as entirely divorced from actual science. Since February, Facebook has been banning posts claiming the virus was man-made or manufactured “following consultations with leading health organizations, including the World Health Organization” who had “debunked” the claim. So now Facebook will allow you to talk about it. Anthony Fauci and others have acknowledged that there is a basis to suspect the lab as the origin of the outbreak. The false claim that this theory was “debunked” was pushed by various media platforms as part of the criticism of then President Donald Trump and his Administration. Facebook would not allow the theory to be discussed as “debunked” despite widespread criticism that Facebook was, again, engaging in corporate censorship. Facebook has long banned anyone who discussed the evidence that a worldwide pandemic killing millions and destroying the global economy may have been released from a government lab in Wuhan, China. There was a time when such a headline would only appear on The Onion, but it is true.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |