Australian Censors Back Down, Highlighting the U.S. as a Free Speech Haven
Officials suspend efforts to force X to suppress the world’s access to video of a crime.
Officials suspend efforts to force X to suppress the world’s access to video of a crime.
The feds charged Alex Choi with “causing the placement of explosive or incendiary device on an aircraft” after he shot fireworks out of a helicopter into an empty desert.
Corey Harris attracted widespread news coverage—including from Reason—when a video showed him behind the wheel during a court hearing about a suspended license. Except he never had a license at all.
Corey Harris' case should never have been a national news story to begin with.
From tattoos to abortions to gender expression, a confusing mess of laws govern which Americans are considered adults.
New bipartisan legislation would sunset Section 230 after next year.
The intelligence community is admitting that info from data brokers is sensitive but isn’t accepting hard limits on how to use it.
Unless the Supreme Court rules against this practice, it is certain to continue.
Congress is "silencing the 170 million Americans who use the platform to communicate," the company argues.
Instead of lobbying for age verification and youth social media bans, parents can simply restrict their kids' smartphone use.
Calls from the left and right to mimic European speech laws bring the U.S. to a crossroads between robust First Amendment protections and rising regulation.
Instead of trusting parents to manage their families, lawmakers from both parties prefer to empower the Nanny State.
Local hostility to free speech may become a global problem.
The American Sunlight Project contends that researchers are being silenced by their critics.
The News2Share cofounder is revolutionizing news coverage.
Plus: Masking protesters, how Google Search got so bad, Columbia's anti-apartheid protests of the '80s, and more...
Plus: A listener asks the editors to steel man the case for the Jones Act, an antiquated law that regulates maritime commerce in U.S. waters.
Plus: Homework liberation in Poland, Orthodox rabbi tells students to flee Columbia, toddler anarchy, and more...
Banning companies for doing business with China is a bad path to start down.
Ethan Blevins of the Pacific Legal Foundation explains why. I myself have made similar arguments.
"I am not in the newsroom," the embattled NPR chieftain said over and over again.
The author of The Anxious Generation argues that parents, schools, and society must keep kids off of social media.
An interview with Consumer Choice Center Deputy Director Yaël Ossowski.
The push to regulate social media content infringes on rights guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment.
Fight back through better information and discourse, not by empowering the government.
If adopted by the Supreme Court, Prof. Candeub's approach would be a grave menace to freedom of speech.
Teens who use social media heavily also spend the most in-person time with friends.
From struggle sessions to cancel culture, the story depicts the terrors of surveillance authoritarianism.
Only 22 of the 476 studies in The Anxious Generation contain data on either heavy social media use or serious mental issues among adolescents, and none have data on both.
"It's just an effort to keep everybody safe and make sure nobody has any ill will," he claimed.
A new survey highlights how fear-based parenting drives phone-based childhoods.
Prof. Hamburger continues to conflate coercion and voluntary choice.
Prof. Hamburger is wrong to argue that the use of the word "abridgment" implies that noncoercive government persuasion directed at social media firms violates the First Amendment.
The law would require platforms to use invasive measures to prevent most teenagers under 16 from making social media accounts and bar all minors from sexually explicit sites.
The problem is the users, not the apps.
Plus: NYC squatters, sex differences and chess ability, trouble at the ACLU, and more...
The Biden administration’s social media meddling went far beyond "information" and "advice."
If partisans have one thing in common, it's confirmation bias.
The justices established guidelines for determining whether that is true in any particular case.
The government is entitled to try to persuade social media to take down posts, but not to coerce them to do so.
Several justices seemed concerned that an injunction would interfere with constitutionally permissible contacts.
Plus: A listener asks about Republicans and Democrats monopolizing political power in the United States.
The newspaper portrays the constitutional challenge to the government's social media meddling as a conspiracy by Donald Trump's supporters.
"It's a disturbing gift of unprecedented authority to President Biden and the Surveillance State," said Sen. Rand Paul (R–Ky.).
Plus: Kamala Harris' abortion clinic visit, Karl Marx's hypocrisy, CDC data struggles, and more...
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