Google and Facebook don't qualify for first amendment protections

[Commentary] Are Facebook and Google's practices of privileging certain information really analogous to what newspaper editors do, and therefore similarly protected by the First Amendment? The answer is no. Making decisions about what and how information is conveyed does not automatically make one an editor entitled to First Amendment protection. 

There are also other analogies to draw between Google is doing (eg providing users information) that would not entitle it First Amendment protection. For instance, grocery stores also provide customers information through their shelf displays. And we all know the saying that “actions speak louder than words.” We say that because actions provide information, but we surely do not think each of us an editor protected by the First Amendment every time we act. So far, the debate over what role the internet giants are playing as they gather, remix, and disseminate information has been playing out in the courts. But with the growing interest in Congress in the way social media companies are shaping public discourse suggests these questions will soon be debated there as well, very possibly with an eye toward new regulations. 

[Heather Whitney is a doctoral candidate in philosophy at New York University.]