![]() ![]() ![]() Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia have resulted from their violations of Twitter's content policies against hate speech, spreading disinformation, or promoting violence. However, the bans or temporary suspensions of high-profile right wing figures like Donald Trump or Rep. He has feuded with the likes of Jeff Bezos and rapper Azealia Banks, and once falsely accused a British diver who helped rescue 12 Thai boys and their soccer coach from a flooded cave of being a "pedo guy."Ĭonservatives have long argued that social media networks are biased against them, and see Musk as a figure who would be sympathetic to their concerns. Musk is famous for his rough-and-tumble, no-holds-barred approach to Twitter that has long delighted his fans and repulsed his detractors. "So let's have someone in charge who respects the first amendment and free speech." -Rep. "This is the public square today, these social, these big tech platforms, this is where we have debate in our culture and our country today," Jordan told Fox News on Wednesday. ![]() That’s because Musk is using Twitter the right way, and, with Jordan, he will always have an ally in government who will help him stay the course… even by trying to intimidate the competition.Account icon An icon in the shape of a person's head and shoulders. Musk is not violating anybody’s First Amendment rights by promoting his right-wing views.īut, unlike Zuckerberg, he will never draw the ire of congressional Republicans and receive vaguely threatening letters. In any case, shaping speech in a way that suits his personal beliefs is much more valuable.Īs the owner of Twitter, that is absolutely his prerogative. He has paid a price for doing so ( quite literally), but a few billion dollars more or less don’t make much of a difference to him. Musk has transformed Twitter into a right-wing social media platform. Well, well, well… who is taking sides now and trying to engage in political persecution by sending an ominous letter to the head of a company that competes with an ideologically aligned business? ![]() “Indeed, Threads raises serious, specific concerns because it has been marketed as rival of Elon Musk’s Twitter, which has faced political persecution from the Biden Administration following Musk’s commitment to free speech,” Jordan wrote. However, the next line in Jordan’s letter gets to the heart of the matter, which, as it turns out, isn’t censorship at all. And, in the screenshot Jordan references, it is quite clear that the user has the option of still following that account. The evidence the lawmaker provides is Threads asking users if they really want to follow an account known for spreading misinformation or that belongs to someone who has violated the company’s community standard in the past. In addition, the “censorship” that he is referencing isn’t censorship at all. Therefore, Jordan is sending this letter to the wrong place. What Jordan is complaining about is that Threads, the newly launched social media app that is challenging Twitter, is already “censoring” content.Ĭiting Meta’s track record of acquiescing to government demands to remove certain information from its websites, Jordan writes that his committee “is concerned about potential First Amendment violations that have occurred or will occur on the Threads platform.”Īs the chairman of the Judiciary Committee should know, the First Amendment applies to government censorship and does not prohibit individuals, companies, and organizations from restricting speech. However, that is essentially what Jordan is doing by trying to bully Zuckerberg.Īnd, based on his letter, he does it, at least in part, to help Elon Musk, the right-wing owner of Twitter. In addition, many of them operate as near monopolies, and there is very limited government oversight.ĭoes that mean that the solution to these problems is that the government should decide which content can be displayed and which cannot? It is very clear that these websites and apps have had a detrimental impact on society, and Zuckerberg’s Facebook is one of the main culprits. Social media platforms do incredible harm by not only spreading misinformation but, in many cases, steering users toward such content to keep them “engaged” longer. In Jordan’s defense, these are thorny issues. On Monday, he sent a letter to Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg regarding the company’s new “Threads” social media app… and he did all of those things. If Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) really feels strongly that the government should not be involved in how social media companies run their businesses or what content they should or shouldn’t display on their platforms, he has a funny way of showing it. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |