The Folly of Government-Imposed Social Media 'Neutrality'
Trump supports a bill that would encourage censorship in the name of free speech.
Trump supports a bill that would encourage censorship in the name of free speech.
At his social media summit on Thursday, the president ranted incoherently about the media's "crooked," "dishonest," and "dangerous" speech.
Plus: Air-launched rockets, the GOP becomes the party of Trump, and Pelosi feuds with AOC.
"The cost of not doing this is the harm done to other Googlers every time they encounter these terms," says the company's diversity and inclusion team.
The president invited Republican lawmakers as well as social media stars who claim that tech giants are suppressing free speech.
The New York congresswoman's use of Twitter seems similar to the president's in constitutionally relevant ways.
Few people who tweeted #NotMyAriel were actually upset about Halle Bailey portraying the mermaid princess.
The court says the "interactive space" created by his account is a public forum, meaning that the president's viewpoint discrimination violates the First Amendment.
Jon Goldsmith was charged with third-degree harassment after calling Deputy Cory Dorsey a "stupid sum bitch" online.
Sen. Josh Hawley (R–Mo.) has proposed a dreadful bill that would give the government control of internet content. He thinks the only reason anyone could be opposed is because they've been bought off.
Countries across the world tackle political misinformation with authoritarian censorship.
It's Ravelry, and it's not just a "knitting site."
"Section 230 has nothing to do with neutrality. Nothing. Zip. There is absolutely no weight to that argument," Wyden says. He oughta know. He wrote the damn thing.
Stanford Law professor and former Google attorney Daphne Keller says tech giants are facing pressure from governments worldwide to clamp down on content.
Plus: Immigration officials confirm Trump tweets about new raids, Elizabeth Warren talks sex work decriminalization, and more...
Hawley is selling it as a way to fight tech-company "bias" against Republicans. Don't believe him.
I shouted out, who killed online freedom of speech? When after all, it was you and me.
Be afraid as more journalists and politicians start calling for stronger policing of online speech.
Plus: psychedelics research bill moves forward, big companies push back against abortion bans, and more...
Despite scant evidence, everyone wants to believe that social media has a unique ability to control our thoughts and actions.
When Tucker Carlson and Elizabeth Warren agree on trade, regulation, and social media, it's time to rethink a few things.
The video platform temporarily demonetized a conservative comedian's channel, satisfying no one.
Censorship inevitably ends up being used to protect the powerful from criticism.
Plus: Spending bill includes pro-marijuana changes, State Department starts collecting social media accounts of visa applicants, and more...
Abroad, legislators are in the mood to theatrically punish social media companies. CEOs shouldn’t play along.
The "blogfather" once touted the internet as the antidote to Big Government, Big Business, and Big Media. Now he wants the feds to crack down on social media.
In the best of all possible worlds, such actions wouldn't be necessary. In the current climate, boycotting social media might spark a return to a robust marketplace of ideas.
"I want to be clear that the comments I made are not indicative of who I am or who I've become in the years since."
Social media platforms and governments are "voluntarily" teaming up to ban "violent extremist content." What could go wrong?
The AFL-CIO's Twitter account appears to endorse a workers' revolution.
Co-founder Chris Hughes' call for antitrust action is vainglorious and misguided.
Resist when politicians declare that speech (even radical speech) is a “threat to our democracy.”
Private property rights, public squares, "dangerous" speech, and pre-regulatory suck-ups, all debated on the Reason Podcast.
Classifying heavy internet use as medical addiction leads to bad policy and inferior patient care.
Right after 290 people were killed in a series of Easter Sunday bombings
"Feeling cute, might just gas some inmates today, IDK."
Subreddits on sexual themes will also be banned from running ads.
They say the social media companies display a bias against conservatives.
Will a thirst to punish Silicon Valley destroy our liberty?
In a now-deleted Facebook post, Loudoun County deputies brag about a drug bust, get dragged, and likely don't learn any lessons.
Do you have a license to link to that story? Will your sexy Tinder photo get confused with a celebrity's?
Q&A with political strategist Liz Mair.
With big tech helping government officials to control the sharing of information, we need to support alternatives to undermine their censorious efforts.
Plus: SCOTUS declines Hawaii lesbian case, UC stands by professor in free speech standoff, and ACLU warns of "privacy Trojan horse."
Nobody in the media should be supporting an elected official trying to control what speech online platforms allow.
There's no room for errors and online platforms face huge fines, likely encouraging overly broad takedowns.
"Google and Facebook should not be a law unto themselves. They should not be able to discriminate against conservatives."
Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.
This modal will close in 10