Censorship

The Federal Communications Commission split along party lines on President Donald Trump’s social media executive order, previewing a potential battle to come as the agency weighs action. Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel said Trump wants to turn the FCC into “speech police.” Commissioner Mike O’Rielly said he’s troubled that “voices are stifled by liberal tech leaders.” FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, who controls the agency’s agenda, said that the agency will “carefully review any petition for rulemaking filed by the Department of Commerce.” “This debate is an important one,” Chairman Pai added. Com

White House press secretary Kayleigh NcEnany used a May 28 press conference to give journalists "the facts" about Twitter and other social media platforms, which she said were "targetting their bias against President Trump and conservatives online." "There are various shields in place that essentially shield these social media companies and allow them to censor conservative users and we're are not able to see what happens behind those shields. That section was one of those.

On May 28, President Donald Trump signed an executive order cracking down on "censorship" by social media sites. Here's the reaction.

It is the policy of the United States to foster clear ground rules promoting free and open debate on the internet.  Prominent among the ground rules governing that debate is the immunity from liability created by section 230(c) of the Communications Decency Act (section 230(c)).  47 U.S.C.

Federal Communications Commissioner Brendan Carr slammed social media and their Sec. 230 exemption from liability for how they handle third-party content--both taking it down and leaving it up. Tucker Carlson asked Commissioner Carr why the White House and Congress had not done anything about the exemption. Commissioner Carr cited the reports that the President's executive order would be "addressing some of these issues," then went off on social media himself.

Apparently, President Donald Trump is considering establishing a panel to review complaints of anticonservative bias on social media, in a move that would likely draw pushback from technology companies and others. The plans are still under discussion but could include the establishment of a White House-created commission that would examine allegations of online bias and censorship. The administration could also encourage similar reviews by federal regulatory agencies, such as the Federal Communications Commission and the Federal Election Commission, apparently.

President Donald Trump’s attack on the Voice of America, calling its content anti-American, has led to polarized battle lines that are common now on national issues. President Trump supporters say the US needs an unabashedly pro-American voice to rally world publics to its side.

House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Eliot Engel (D-NY), Ranking Member Michael McCaul (R-TX), and Rep Tom Malinowski (D-NJ) joined Rep John Curtis (R-UT) in releasing the bipartisan Open Technology Fund Authorization Act (HR 6621). The legislation will bolster US efforts to respond to oppressive censorship and internet restriction worldwide by authorizing the Open Technology Fund (OTF) as an independent grantee within the US Agency for Global Media.

As lockdowns, shelter-in-place orders, and social distancing threaten to stretch out into the weeks, months, and even years ahead, there is a scramble to collect, in real time, the overwhelming abundance of information being produced online. Without it, the record of how we lived, how we changed, and how we addressed the global pandemic would be left incomplete and at the mercy of a constantly shifting internet, where even recent history has a tendency to get buried or vanish.

In countries with fragile peace, such as South Sudan, or those under newly proposed ceasefires, such as Yemen, the need for communication is keen. The coronavirus is hampering communication such as women’s networks that have helped to disrupt terrorist cells, counter violent extremism, and resolve disputes through nonviolent mediation and negotiation. Government-enforced lockdowns in some countries have torn away this part of the social fabric. Governments may suspend some human rights during crisis and conflict. Not so humanitarian principles, which are specific to crisis and war.