Big Tech censorship

Donald Trump Jr. has an editorial at  The Hill,  about censorship on the internet.   He runs through a bill of particulars, which concern matters that we have talked about at Ratburger.org.   The following is the middle third of his editorial, which amounts to good old-fashioned journalism about something he saw while at CPAC.

 

Silicon Valley lobbyists have splashed millions of dollars all over the Washington swamp to play on conservatives’ innate faith in the free-market system and respect for private property. Even as Big Tech companies work to exclude us from the town square of the 21st century, they’ve been able to rely on misguided conservatives to carry water for them with irrelevant pedantry about whether the First Amendment applies in cases of social media censorship.

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) has been making a name for himself as a Republican prepared to stand up to Big Tech malfeasance since his time as Missouri’s attorney general. He delivered a tour de force interview with The Wall Street Journal’s Kimberly Strassel in front of the CPAC crowd, one that provided a clear-eyed assessment of the ongoing affront to the freedoms of conservative speech and expression.

Hawley demolished the absurd notion that “conservative principles” preclude taking action to ensure free debate online simply because Big Tech firms — the most powerful corporations in the world — are private companies.

Hawley pointed out that Big Tech companies already enjoy “sweetheart deals” under current regulations that make their malfeasance a matter of public concern. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, for instance, allows them to avoid liability for the content that users post to their platforms. To address this problem, Hawley proposed adding a viewpoint neutrality requirement for platforms that benefit from Section 230’s protections, which were originally enacted to protect the internet as “a forum for a true diversity of political discourse.”

“Google and Facebook should not be a law unto themselves,” Hawley declared. “They should not be able to discriminate against conservatives. They should not be able to tell us we need to sit down and shut up!”

It’s high time other conservative politicians started heeding Hawley’s warnings….

I looked at Senator Hawley’s website, but did not see anything there on this topic.   I hope he will bring forward some good initiative.

9+
avataravataravataravataravataravataravataravataravatar

10 thoughts on “Big Tech censorship”

  1. I don’t disagree with DJT II at all but this is how I choose to approach Big Tech:

    1. Use them to make money.

    2. Ignore the politics. I’ve made some decent donuts off of Mark Zuckerberg but couldn’t care less about his politics! I feel like I’ve come out the winner in that game because he’d probably be horrified to know that a conservative profited from his company.

    P.S. As an aside, on the topic of MZ, he has bought an entire neighborhood to build his mansion surrounded by… wait for it… 10 ft walls.

    0

  2. Vimeo censors the internet.   They disappeared a church’s account because they livestreamed a Bible conference that included a session with testimonies by ex-gays who said it is possible to change.   Vimeo deleted everything, including a library of sermons.   Evidently traditionalist Christianity violates Vimeo’s terms of service.

    https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/techwatch/alexander-hall/2019/03/19/vimeo-bans-church-pushing-traditional-christian-values-0

    0

  3. The way I approach tech is to find alternatives that are closer to my view of what a tech company should be. I don’t use google, I use DuckDuckGo. I use Brave. I haven’t used Facebook since 2013 and I only use LinkedIn for professional purposes.

    There are 160 million GOP voters and if they would do the same the tech companies would change. Instead those 160 million choose to be cucked.

    1+
    avatar
  4. Twitter just confirmed it shadowbanned some tweets of The Federalist‘s co-founder, Sean Davis. His tweets regarding the transcripts of Lisa Page’s testimony in front of Congress disappeared to everyone in his feed but Davis himself, giving the appearance that those tweets were still being seen by others when in fact only Davis could see them.

    Twitter officials finally admitted to Davis this week that they did shadowban the tweets about Page “to keep people safe.” Safe from what? Public information? The truth? These tweets were simply screenshots of the Page transcripts with some commentary by Davis.

    Information Darkness Is Coming (Unless…)

     

     

     

     

    further remarks by Ned Ryun:

     

    Facebook, Google, Twitter, and the like are functionally monopolies. Google dominates as the de facto search engine of the planet. In many countries, Facebook is synonymous with the internet. Politicians across the country now use social media as their primary form of communication with their constituents.

    People telling you there is no bias and that these companies aren’t monopolies—the ones insisting that the tech companies shouldn’t be broken up or face any regulatory scrutiny—turn out, typically, to be the kinds of people who have wads of tech company cash falling out of their back pockets.

    0

Leave a Reply