The Death of BuzzFeed News Was a Facebook Murder-Suicide
Online media companies got exactly what they said they wanted.
Online media companies got exactly what they said they wanted.
The feds invoke national security to take away more of your rights and pretend they're keeping you safe.
The lawsuit blames the companies for stoking "anxiety, depression, thoughts of self-harm, and suicidal ideation."
Never underestimate officials’ ability to turn embarrassing moments into awful opportunities.
The COVID-19 lab leak theory was labeled "misinformation." Now it's the most plausible explanation.
Intelligence Squared U.S. has a new name and ambitions to host presidential debates.
Plus: Dueling court decisions on an abortion drug, an update from Riley Gaines, and more...
A Colorado man was convicted under an anti-stalking law for sending hostile messages online.
Join Reason on YouTube and Facebook Thursday at 1 p.m. Eastern for a discussion about Congress' attempt to ban TikTok with the RESTRICT Act.
Three reasons not to ban the popular social media app
Once again, politicians use popular fears to push for open-ended power.
Jonathan Haidt's integrity and transparency are admirable, but the studies he's relying on aren't strong enough to support his conclusions.
Today, TikTok. Tomorrow, who knows?
Which sentence in this podcast was generated using A.I.?
Plus: Theatrics at the House hearing on TikTok, doomsday merger predictions haven't panned out, and more...
It would result in shortages, decreases in productivity, and higher production costs affecting millions of American workers and nearly every consumer.
Federal, state, and local officials will always threaten to weaponize the state against private actors they don't like. The "Kia Challenge" provides the latest example.
The legal challenge to censorship by proxy highlights covert government manipulation of online speech.
Plus: A listener asks the editors if the nation is indeed unraveling or if she is just one of "The Olds" now.
The latest Twitter Files shows a partnership between Stanford University researchers and government-funded organizations encouraged social media companies to police true information.
Momfluenced bemoans unrealistic expectations set on American mothers but then establishes new ones.
The bill is overbroad and could have unintended consequences.
Online communities have made their diagnoses their identity.
While the FDA keeps experimental treatments out of reach, the spoonie world makes a diagnosis into an identity.
Plus: The editors recommend the best books for sparking interest in free market principles.
Turning every streaming service into TikTok is bad for the internet. It'll be disastrous for music.
Members of Congress showed their true colors at a Thursday hearing.
The trade association says the overbroad and vague A.B. 2273 places unconstitutional burdens on speech.
Plus: U.S. special forces seeks “next generation” deepfake tech, the economic cost of the PRO Act, and more…
Plus: The editors puzzle over Donald Trump’s latest list describing his vision for America.
A new 60-minute screen time warning on TikTok won’t stop kids from scrolling.
The latest bid to amend Section 230 would threaten free speech and creators' ability to monetize content while also subjecting tech companies to a flood of frivolous lawsuits.
In Meme Wars, so-called "disinformation" experts call for the suppression of more ideas and speakers to protect democracy.
A senator, a state attorney general, and a former congressman excoriated the law while getting much of it wrong.
The push to label the lab leak thesis a racist conspiracy theory now looks even more foolish.
The Court’s decisions in Gonzalez and subsequent cases could lead to impossible, incompatible consequences.
When society criminalizes outdoor independence, it makes smart phone addiction more likely.
Plus: The U.S. Supreme Court considers another internet free speech case, the Department of Transportation pushes expensive new rail regs, and more...
The Supreme Court’s newest member weighs in on the meaning of Section 230 in Gonzalez v. Google.
Join Reason on YouTube and Facebook on Thursday at 1 p.m. Eastern for a discussion of the decentralized protocol Nostr with NVK, Damus app creator Will Casarin, Nick Gillespie, and Zach Weissmueller.
The social media site slapped a warning on a column in which I criticized the CDC for exaggerating the evidence supporting mask mandates.
Section 230 helped the internet flourish. Now its scope is under scrutiny.
Plus: Did the Pentagon shoot down a hobby radio balloon?, Kentucky abortion ban can be enforced, and more...
"Today's decision is a victory for the First Amendment that should be celebrated by everyone who hopes to see the internet continue as a place where even difficult and contentious issues can be debated and discussed freely," said one attorney.
When COVID-19 and the U.S. government stopped kids from seeing each other, social media was their lifeline.
Gonzalez v. Google presents the Supreme Court’s first opportunity to weigh in on Section 230.
The "interactive artist" inspired by Jack Kirby and Barry Goldwater challenges social media and intellectual conformity.
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