It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Republicans in the Senate plan on striking a blow for online free speech — by eradicating censorship of conservatives online. Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) introduced a new bill June 19, meant to tackle the problem of tech monopolies and their consistent censorship of conservatives and conservative ideology. The bill, called the Ending Support for Internet Censorship Act, looks to remove the immunity enjoyed by Big Tech companies from Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. The bill would target companies with more than 30 million monthly users, such as Facebook, Google, Twitter, and YouTube. Hawley wrote that the companies could earn their immunity back through a series of third-party external audits that provided “convincing evidence that their algorithms and content-removal practices are politically neutral.” The legislation would exclude smaller companies. Hawley’s bill is more interested in going after the “tech monopolies” that present a greater threat through censorship. He stated in his press release: “There’s a growing list of evidence that shows big tech companies making editorial decisions to censor viewpoints they disagree with. Even worse, the entire process is shrouded in secrecy because these companies refuse to make their protocols public. This legislation simply states that if the tech giants want to keep their government-granted immunity, they must bring transparency and accountability to their editorial processes and prove that they don’t discriminate.”
Law professor Josh Blackman broke down the bill in a helpful Twitter thread, noting its scope is limited to companies with more than 30 million active users in the United States, Hawley included a First Amendment carve-out, and that companies that don’t seek out certification would continue to exist, just without Section 230 immunity (which would open them up to lawsuits).
They've been banned from Facebook, purged from Twitter and blocked from Instagram. Some of them have been barred from setting foot on the continent of Australia. But you can still find them all on the fledgling social media network Parler. The Twitter-like platform was initially hatched last year as a tool for digital news outlets to claw revenue back from big social networks like Facebook. But as those platforms purge some of the internet’s most inflammatory supporters of President Donald Trump over posts deemed dangerous or offensive, Parler has carved out a niche among these banned right-wing influencers — like Gavin McInnes, Laura Loomer and Milo Yiannopoulos.
so i guess we wait to see if any thing is done over this removing 230 protections could have some pretty interesting implications as far as lawsuits go for the bigger tech companies
President Trump on Wednesday said tech giants Google and Facebook should be sued over alleged bias toward conservatives. “We should be suing Google and Facebook and all that, which perhaps we will,” Trump said during a phone interview with Fox Business Network. Trump also attacked Twitter, claiming without evidence that the company is “making it very hard” to “get out my message” by making it more difficult for people to follow him. “Twitter is just terrible, what they do,” he said. The president reportedly complained about his follower count during an April meeting with Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, who explained his lost followers were largely bots. Republicans have long accused Google and Facebook of suppressing conservative content and ads, something they say violates free speech protections. Others say the sites are private companies that are not bound by the First Amendment and have the ability to regulate the content that appears on their platforms. Some GOP lawmakers have suggested that Congress should remove protections under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act in order to hold web platforms legally liable for content posted by users.