President Trump late on Thursday lashed out at “conservative discrimination” by Twitter, arguing that the top social media companies’ censorship amounts to a national security threat and calling for the elimination of Section 230, which offers these social networks legal protections they wouldn’t have if they were classified as publishers instead of platforms.
At 11:06 p.m. EST, the president tweeted that Twitter is sending out “false” trends that are negative against him.
“Twitter is sending out totally false ‘Trends’ that have absolutely nothing to do with what is really trending in the world. They make it up, and only negative ‘stuff’. Same thing will happen to Twitter as is happening to @FoxNews daytime. Also, big Conservative discrimination!” he wrote.
He then followed it up with a tweet about Section 230.
Then, early on Friday, President Trump again blasted Twitter for banning Pennsylvania State Senator Doug Mastriano.
This isn’t the first time the president has taken aim at the big social media companies and suggested removing their Section 230 protections.
“Why isn’t Biden corruption trending number one on Twitter? Biggest world story, and nowhere to be found. There is no ‘trend’, only negative stories that Twitter wants to put up. Disgraceful! Section 230,” the president tweeted October 28.
According to Twitter, trend results are tailored for the user, based on who a person follows, their interests, and location. “This algorithm identifies topics that are popular now, rather than topics that have been popular for a while or on a daily basis, to help you discover the hottest emerging topics of discussion on Twitter,” it explains in a blog.
Earlier this month, President Trump railed that Twitter was “out of control” after it slapped labels on dozens of his posts, warning users they contained “misinformation.”
And back in May, he said Twitter was not combating “lies and propaganda” from the “Radical Left Democrat Party” and also threatened to revoke 230. That same month, he released an executive order which said the scope of the law needed to be “clarified.”
The New American has previously made the case for why Tech giants like Twitter and Facebook should lose their Section 230 protection.
Under Section 230 of [the Communications Decency Act of 1996], social networks such as Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube are legally protected against content that is shared on their platforms that may be untrue. The law basically treats those companies as a utility, rather than a publisher.
But in acting to censor and “fact check” certain material, they are acting as a publisher. Thus, many believe that those protections should be removed.
Other countries are already taking action against the major social platforms.
Britain, for example, will launch a new watchdog next year to police the tech giants, although it will be more focused on the economic and market dominance aspect than on the free speech and censorship questions.
The AP reports:
The U.K. government said Friday that it’s setting up a “Digital Markets Unit” next year to enforce a new code of conduct governing the behavior of tech giants that dominate the online advertising market.
The Digital Markets Unit, scheduled to launch in April, will oversee a new regulatory regime for tech companies that’s aimed at spurring more competition….
It’s part of a wider push by governments in the U.S. and Europe to constrain the power of big tech companies amid concern about their outsize influence. The European Union this week unveiled proposals to wrest control of data from tech companies and is set to release details next month of a sweeping overhaul of digital regulations aimed at preventing online gatekeepers from stifling competition.
Along similar lines, the United States is pursuing an antitrust case against Google. The Department of Justice asserts that Google uses billions of dollars compiled from its advertising services in order to pay mobile-phone manufacturers, carriers, and browsers, such as Apple Inc.’s Safari, to maintain Google as their preset, default search engine. Thus, Google has a dominant position on hundreds of millions of American mobile devices, giving little opportunity for any competitor to make inroads.
However, the future prospects of American action against Silicon Valley depend on the outcome of the election. If Joe Biden makes it to the White House next year, he not only won’t fight back against Big Tech’s overreach, he will give them free rein over his administration.
