Corporatist Social Media Speech Suppression? - Granite Grok

Corporatist Social Media Speech Suppression?

Social media censorship

We’ve said it ourselves. Private business is free to suppress political speech in it’s own spaces. But what do you do when or if private business works with government to suppress political speech?

John Hayward – Breitbart

When free-speech champions criticize Twitter (or the even more draconian speech controls practiced by platforms like Facebook, in open coordination with government officials), they are often told the First Amendment doesn’t apply to such situations, because private companies can restrict the services they offer however they please.  

But,

What twisted interpretation of the First Amendment would require good citizens to silently accept corporate suppression of political dissent?  …  the camouflaging of government power through “voluntary” cooperation between Big Government and Big Business.  [FCC Commissioner Ajit] Pai spoke of influential officials musing that certain information sources, such as the Drudge Report or Fox News, have gained too much power to influence public discourse… at which point Internet service providers might take the hint, using their “private-sector” powers to quietly implement speech restrictions the government can’t order directly.

I don’t think there is enough diversity in the social media space to make the threat of unbiased competition an impediment to doing the governments bidding and not just because we’re talking about dominant platforms who do not charge for the service they provide. The alternatives are few and lack the reach of the dominant players.

It would take a number of high-profile departures from Twitter of Facebook to provide the cultural stress required and an alternate platform with which to migrate. Where you gonna go, Google+?

Conveniently, Ken White at POPEHAT happens to be railing on about what Twitter has done to Robert Stacy McCain, whom he can’t stand, a tension that makes his remarks that much more relevant. (Twitter has banned McCain.)

I classify Twitter’s action as bad customer service and as private speech I don’t like because of my conservative views. Those views include the following: private companies (which are individuals organized to do things as efficiently and safely as possible) have a right to free speech and free association. Corporations are people! They don’t lose those rights because they get too big or because someone thinks they look like public entities if you squint. It’s okay for corporations to sell products, or engage in speech, that people hate. People and corporations don’t owe you anything: not a free lunch, not a free platform. You’re responsible for reading the contracts you sign, physically or digitally. Whether or not you support anti-discrimination laws governing private entities, they can’t be reconciled completely with free speech and free association rights. Or, put in law-professor-speech, anti-discrimination values and free speech values are in tension.

But back John Haywards reporting of FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai’s concerns. What if Twitter is doing it because the Government is pressuring them as opposed to using the possibility of pressure as an excuse to use their own views to suppress those they oppose?

All important points and in all an interesting conundrum for social media and the people using them to express political speech.

I have additional thoughts but at this point I’d be interested in hearing yours.

>