This is a tricky issue, one that I see both sides of. One one hand, big tech’s censorship is outrageous, unfair and obvious. On the other, the way this thing is written is terrifying. I think you’ll see even less conservative speech on the major platforms. There is probably a more targeted way of address the liability issue as part of a multi prong approach to reign in big tech. Write it so that platforms with X amount of revenue and users can be sued for ideologically motivated/unequal censorship (based on the argument that the large platforms are now the new public square). But, keep a shield in place regarding their reasonable efforts to prevent illegal activity. In other words, if they take reasonable efforts, however that would be defined, they can’t be held liable for their users’ content.
But that’s just the beginning. Facebook, Google and Twitter need to be investigated for electioneering. Using their market positions to influence elections should be illegal, and likely is. Google is a behemoth and should be broken up (not based on size, but it’s behavior with search, ads, tracking, etc).
That's bull.
If sites don't moderate content they end up like Slashdot, virtually unusable because half the posts are ASCII-art swastikas and white nationalist screeds.
As it is it's impossible for Twitter to keep up with the racists and the idiots who think the election was "rigged".
What about all the idiots and racists who claim the election wasn’t rigged?
They might still be idiots & racists who actually saw reality with regards to the election?
Comments