White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki may have just unwittingly supported former President Donald Trump’s case that major Tech companies violated First Amendment rights of American citizens.
One of the long-running debates surrounding social media censorship is whether a private company like Facebook is even bound by First Amendment protections, since it is a private company and not an affiliate of the federal government, which is bound by our Bill of Rights from restricting Americans’ freedom of speech.
The former president’s argument, in case Silicon Valley The giants have managed to build the network that is now relied on by millions of people as their primary source of news and information and to reach their desired audience, that is, these private companies are limiting severely restrict the constitutionally protected right to freedom of speech.
“The birthright of the American people must prevail against Big Tech and other forces seeking to destroy it. Through this lawsuit, we are standing up for American democracy by standing up for every American’s right to free speech,” said the former president, who was banned by Twitter and Facebook at the end of his term, say while his lawsuit announcement in the first day of this month.
“The birthright of the American people must prevail against Big Tech and other forces seeking to destroy it. Through this lawsuit, we are standing up for American democracy by standing up for free speech for all Americans.” pic.twitter.com/2lRd2kpbiC
– RSBN (@RSBNetwork) July 7, 2021
As attorney and Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz recently noticedBig Tech companies are claiming that Trump’s demand for free speech on their platforms violates of them First Amendment rights, ironically – and this is certainly partly a legal conundrum since both entities allege their rights to freedom of speech being vandalized by others.
“The danger of this ‘new censorship’ – not by governments but by private companies that effectively control the market for ideas – is that it may well be protected by the very amendment designed to designed to keep the idea market open to diverse perspectives,” said Dershowitz, who represented Trump in his first impeachment trial and has praised the social media censorship lawsuit, wrote in an option for Hill.
“Thus, the paradox – and the uphill battle Trump may face in convincing the courts that his right to free speech is unconstitutional to communicate with his millions of followers will bypass the censorship power of social media companies,” he added.
Do Psaki’s comments support Trump’s case?
Yes: 99% (1456 Votes)
No: 1% (20 Votes)
This is really a hard case to argue with – that is, if we are operating under the impression that Facebook, Twitter, and Google are not functioning as agencies of the federal government in any capacity.
How do we be confident that they are not?
If it were us, Jen Psaki just inadvertently undermined that case significantly by bragging about admin’s contact with Facebook, going as far as to reveal that the Biden White House even “flagged” Facebook posts as “wrong information. “
If the federal government requires Facebook to censor what it is, and it’s complying, that changes everything.
On Thursday, Psaki was asked during a press conference to introduce the Biden administration’s request to Big technology more “aggressive” in the task of stamping out “misinformation”. This has given us pause, as the Silicon Valley Thought Police aren’t exactly sure in their efforts to censor and crack down on anything they claim to be, well, be true – think wrong. .
“We are in constant communication with social media platforms, and those engagements often happen through members of our senior staff and also members of our COVID-19 team. I – as Dr. Murthy said, this is a huge problem, of pandemic-specific misinformation,” said Psaki, as reported by Fox News.
“It is important to take faster action on harmful posts. As you know, information travels quite quickly on social media platforms. Sometimes it’s inaccurate and Facebook needs to be quicker to remove harmful offending posts. Posts that fall under their removal policy usually stay around for days. Too long. Information spreads too quickly,” she added.
Psaki also stated: “In the Office of General Surgery, we are flagging Facebook posts that spread misinformation. “We are working with doctors and medical professionals to connect medical professionals with the people who are popular with their audiences with accurate information and promote trusted content. So we’re helping to get trusted content out there. We’ve also established a COVID Community Group to put factual information in the hands of local messengers. “
The Babylon Bees’ gag titles are getting more and more real, aren’t they?
Legislative, executive and judicial branches Welcome Big Tech as the 4th branch of government https://t.co/mPfHmNBxvl
– Babylon Bee (@TheBabylonBee) July 16, 2021
The Biden Administration, which since coming to power in January, now owns the federal government’s COVID-19 response.
As you will likely recall from the days when the Trump administration spearheaded the initial response, the American people love being able to criticize their leaders, no matter what business they run. as the executive branch of the federal government.
If the Biden White House works actively with Big Tech to help them combat “misinformation,” and the Trump administration is routinely accused of disseminating trucks carrying “disinformation” to the American public, then That said, we have to acknowledge that the Biden White House could, at least in theory, also be providing disinformation to Facebook’s testers and moderators.
If this is really all about “misinformation,” there is no way to check the truth of the gatekeepers.
Obviously, there’s a big problem with the White House helping a private company decide what’s true. You know that if the table has been turned over and it is a Republican Party member The authorities admit that they have been in contact with private organizations that release official information, there will be a big reckoning – and it should be in both cases.
The federal government simply cannot claim to be the arbiter of the capital T Truth; that would be actual, legitimate, and exact totalitarianism the kind of ruling fervor that the Founding Fathers sought to eliminate. First Amendment into the United States Constitution.
Meanwhile, if they are working with Facebook to facilitate information managed by the network, that certainly makes Trump’s case against Big Tech’s speech suppression stronger. a lot, at least.