Elon Musk drops the bomb
Musk releases files on Twitter's censorship and collusion to silence the truth before the 2020 presidential election.
The first amendment doesn’t protect Big Tech’s censorship. These companies enjoy the privileges of common carriers without the responsibilities. State antidiscrimination laws are one promising remedy.
The large tech companies are private, and the point isn’t that they violate the First Amendment when they censor users’ speech. But they have participated in the censorship secured by Section 230’s privileges. It therefore is not unreasonable for states to protect Americans from the tech company’s government-sponsored censorship.
“The time has come to subject the Big Tech services and platforms to at least statutory barriers against viewpoint discrimination. They serve the function of common carriers or public squares and enjoy profound dominance. They achieved this dominance with substantial government privileges, including privileges they sought for serving as a conduit for information. So they can be regulated as common carriers, including with state antidiscrimination provisions. And this surely is just, for they have used their government-established dominance and privileges to enforce congressionally privatized censorship.”—Philip Hamburger and Clare Morell /WSJ Commentary July 31, 2021
Let this sink in. Doing the bidding of the government may be a necessary cost of remaining a Mega-corporation, but it corrodes America’s democratic ideals. Acting under orders from the government to suppress free speech is a 1st amendment violation. Big Tech censored and suppressed to help Biden win the White House.
Elon Musk announced on Friday that that "What really happened with the Hunter Biden story suppression by Twitter will be published on Twitter at 5pm ET!" He then dropped the bombshell: The Twitter Files
It's about anticipating what is coming. Why is Musk 3 steps behind? Billions received this medical experimentation. What is the intent of this?
"Broadcasters" of information are supposed to exist "for the public good" and are governed by the FCC's Communications Decency Act -- which includes Section 230: companies that do not edit / curate / censor content are considered agnostic "platforms" and are not liable for content; whereas companies that do edit / curate / censor are considered "publishers" and thus liable for all content. So surely all of the social media providers are publishers, and therefore sue-able. imho