Join Reason on YouTube and Facebook at 1 p.m. Eastern for a live analysis of the internal Twitter documents recently published by Matt Taibbi, Bari Weiss, and Michael Shellenberger.
Plus: Justin Amash and Jane Coaston talk about the Libertarian Party, a fatal flaw in anti-vaping studies, and more...
The most disturbing aspect of the “Twitter Files” is the platform’s cozy relationship with federal officials who demanded suppression of speech they considered dangerous.
Plus: The editors briefly celebrate a noteworthy shake-up in the Senate.
"Armory correctly notes the InRange Video and Recoil Article are accessible "to millions of people," as is anything posted publicly on the internet. Nonetheless, Armory fails to show the InRange Video or Recoil Article reached members of the potential jury pool, let alone irreparably tainted them."
Content moderators had "weekly confabs" with law enforcement officials, reports Matt Taibbi.
A podcast conversation on 303 Creative between Joshua Matz and me, hosted by Jeffrey Rosen.
Instead of debating whether the platform has been flooded by bigotry, Elon Musk should tell the congressman to mind his own business.
Among other things, the court concludes that, "given that Plaintiff alleges that his 'personal background as an Arab-American and Muslim' was in part responsible for his lack of a traditional diagnosis of ADHD, his personal background may make him particularly vulnerable to the harms of disclosure."
Twitter employees have indicated that shadow banning—at least by some definitions—is both real and common.
Plaintiff "has alleged nothing suggesting he has any greater basis to fear retaliation than the plaintiffs in most discrimination cases."
"[T]he District wants to be able to use government resources to collect and utilize these e-mail addresses to promote and advance the particular 'community outreach' issues and positions of District (government) leaders while denying others in the community the opportunity to utilize the e-mail addresses to share differing viewpoints."
by Jacob Mchangama (Justitia), Heini Skorini (Univ. of Faroe Islands) & Mathias Meier (Justitia).
A website designer asks SCOTUS to let her eschew work that contradicts her opposition to gay marriage.
The D.C. Circuit rejects a First Amendment challenge to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's anticircumvention and antitrafficking provisions.
The press pass is for election-related events connected to Maricopa County's ongoing ballot counting; the panel concluded that The Gateway Pundit was likely to succeed on its claim that the denial was unconstitutionally based on its viewpoints.
"You have this looming power over you that essentially can end your career," says Stanford's Jay Bhattacharya.
Plus: ACLU sides against religious freedom, abortions after Dobbs, and more...
A Democratic member of Congress laments how Twitter handled the New York Post's reporting on Hunter Biden's laptop.
Plus: The editors consider a listener question on the involuntary hospitalization of the mentally ill.
"The state of New York can't turn bloggers into Big Brother, but it's trying to do just that," said FIRE attorney Daniel Ortner.
A million hypotheticals bloom in arguments over when and where the government may compel speech.
The Twitter Files are interesting but contain few true surprises. A mix of incompetence and partisanship got the site in trouble.
The "free speech absolutist" is maintaining some content restrictions while loosening others.
"[T]here is increasingly no place for social conservatives in many large law firms."
Plus: Freedom's Furies, SCOTUS to take up student loan forgiveness plan, and more...
It's a private company. Its owner can do what he chooses, even if it seems crazy.
