Conservatives held hearings this week that aimed to show that Twitter was biased against conservatives. Instead, delegate Alexandria Ocasio-CortezIn a series of pointed questions, showed Twitter had really changed Its terms of service to avoid deleting racist tweets by Donald Trump.
More broadly, the questions to Ocasio-Cortez showed how free speech absolutism is used to stifle free expression. When Republicans claim to be fighting censorship, they are really attempting to use government power to intimidate and control the press. It’s not just hypocrisy. This is deliberate Orwellian manipulation.
The Republican-controlled House Oversight and Accountability Committee began its hearings in October 2020 to investigate whether a link to a story about Hunter Biden’s laptop was improperly suppressed. It was revealed that the DNC was hacked by Russia as part of an effort to throw Donald Trump in the election.
Twitter lifted the link ban from Hunter Biden’s story after 24 hours, and retrospectively officials said the block was a mistake. He emphasized that it was difficult to differentiate between misinformation and legitimate but controversial reporting ahead of the election.
It’s important to note that Joe Biden was not president at the time of Twitter’s decision, and Twitter officials say they were not contacted by Biden’s campaign about the matter.
To the contrary, evidence was presented that Trump tried to influence Twitter, and that Twitter bent over backwards to accommodate him.
Donald Trump, while President, contacted Twitter to try to get them to remove a tweet in which model and TV personality Chrissy Teigen called him “”p**** a**b****, “” on the grounds that the tweet was defamatory.
Obviously, the tweet was offensive. But defamatory speech is still protected by the First Amendment. The President of the United States, under the First Amendment, is not supposed to use his power and influence to try to censor criticism.
Twitter did not remove Teigen’s tweet. But he accomplished Trump in other situations.
Ocasio-Cortez asked former Twitter employee Anika Navarroli about a 2019 tweet in which Trump told four Democratic congresswomen of color to “go back” to where they came from — although they are all US citizens, Whose home is the United States of America. Twitter had a policy against racially inciting tweets, including as an example a tweet telling immigrants and people of color to “go back”, which was aimed at people of color and immigrants as non-Americans unworthy of rights. to be stigmatized as outsiders. Trump’s tweets, in other words, directly and specifically violate Twitter’s terms of service.
Navaroli flagged the tweet and suggested that it be removed. However, she was overruled by Dale Harvey, Twitter’s vice president of trust and safety. Twitter’s terms of service were then changed so that asking people to “go back” was no longer an example of banned racist speech on the platform. Rather than remove Trump’s tweet, Twitter decided to change its terms to allow more racially incendiary language on the platform.
Ocasio-Cortez concluded that the change showed a right-wing bias rather than a left-wing bias on Twitter. it happens. But prejudice in itself is not an issue of free speech. Media organizations – like, say, Fox News – can express far-right opinions if they want under the First Amendment.
When media organizations change their editorial stance to avoid confronting those in power, it raises questions. Trump often used his platform as president to attack news outlets, inciting a flurry of threats and harassment against individual journalists. Twitter had good reason to fear that he might come after the company if they subjected him to their terms. Sure enough, he threatened to pass legislation to destroy the company when they began flagging some of his tweets for misinformation.
Of course, Trump claimed Twitter was “censoring” him when he deleted his account after using the platform to incite a Capitol riot. The Right always says that when someone refuses to air its inflammatory statements, it is silenced. Most recently, when AT&T removed Newsmax over a fee dispute, some Republicans claimed it was an act of censorship, and threatened hearings aimed at bullying AT&T into restoring the network.
But the First Amendment doesn’t mean that anyone should always be allowed to say whatever they want from every platform. The First Amendment is specifically supposed to protect the media from government interference. That government intervention can include censorship and the removal of information, such as when Trump tried to get Twitter to remove Chrissy Teigen’s tweets.
But government interference can also mean forcing a company to print government propaganda. If someone tells President Trump new York Times“You give me a weekly column, or I’ll shut you down,” is a violation of the First Amendment, of course as Trump said. times It could not print anything critical of him.
Ocasio-Cortez Shows How GOP “Censorship!” And then uses those screams as a way to threaten media outlets with retaliation. The House nonsense investigation on Twitter is an implicit warning to anyone who deviates from Republican priorities. If you make a good faith effort to enforce your terms of service, the Republicans will come for you once they control Congress.
When the GOP uses its power to intimidate and discipline the press, it is bound to have an impact on both traditional and social media. In this way the slogan of “free speech” is used to suppress speech. The Right believes that everyone should be obligated to broadcast their message, and only their message, at all times. This is not a brave step against censorship. This is authoritarianism.