Do you really think “Big Tech” is trying to silence conservative voices?
Following President Donald Trump’s Twitter/Facebook/Instagram ban, and the deplatforming of Parler, representatives of big companies like Apple and Amazon have said it’s an effort to try and prevent future violence.
Firstly, you have to know this isn’t a First Amendment issue, which means the government cannot punish or prohibit most speech. Private companies have far greater discriminating powers in who they allow to use their services.
In fact, you wouldn’t have to go very far to find posts from Trump, and many more in government, that likely violated terms of service, but had been exempt from actions that would have limited others because of the positions they held.
If you think the government should intercede or nationalize social media, that wouldn’t be much different than “seizing the means of production,” and allowing the kind of slide toward Communism people have been shouting down whenever health care and welfare are brought up.
The other, less extreme tactic, is reworking the legislation for Section 230, which has kept platforms separate from other publishers.
Under Section 230, social media platforms are able to act as a “third party,” meaning they can’t be held liable for potentially libelous or otherwise harmful material posted to the sites.
Even in the post-Trump era it’s likely that many conservatives will continue the fight to remove those protections from sites. The issue, really, is that these sites are just so massive, with so many users, there isn’t enough manpower to monitor all the possibly libelous or harmful material.
Here’s a thought: Maybe just don’t use social media to try and incite violence?