Last week I wrote how crisis can be broadening. This week I’m reminded that crisis can be used to gain deeper, possibly illegal, powers.
That’s what I think of when I look at what’s gone on in recent days on social media platforms with the permanent ban of President Donald Trump, followed by the successful move of major tech moguls to have Parler, a right-wing social media platform, removed from the internet.
I understand that social media platforms are private companies and have the right to refuse service to anyone in violation of their terms and conditions. Yet, censorship at this level deeply concerns me. Especially as these platforms are not exactly consistent.
For example, Ayatollah Khamanei’s tweets threatening the destruction of Israel have never been removed, let alone his account temporarily or permanently banned.
Another example: A tweet last week by the Chinese embassy in the US, using classic communist Newspeak, praised genocide via forced sterilization of Uighur women by the Chinese authorities. This remained up even as Trump was being permanently banned. The Chinese tweet was removed only following a huge uproar that, among other arguments, included the rank hypocrisy.
This latest move by Apple, Google and Amazon to blacklist Parler is really frightening. These three tech companies already wield an enormous amount of power and influence in our culture and economy. Now, to band together to censor a platform? This doesn’t bode well for any of us.
The problem with power is that when it’s over used for a cause that one feels is just, it’s easy to look away from the overreach and instead applaud the sentiment.
But once that overreach has been used, it becomes incredibly easy to use again — and who’s to say that the next time one will agree with the stand taken?
I’m reminded of the Patriot Act — the massive overreach by government in the face of a different crisis whose inroads into our privacy is now a fact of life.
So what should be the response when the US Capitol is overrun by thugs, police officers are viciously attacked, and “patriots” call for our vice president to be hanged? I was shaken to my core seeing what unfolded.
The response should be to use every legal means to try the perpetrators — including the president, who incited this behavior. And yes, it must include monitoring of social media sites, as well as possible bans. But I am extremely wary of private companies using their unprecedented power — possibly even gaining more power — to control politics and political discussion.
Internet media companies enjoy the legal protection of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. That means that they — unlike newspapers — cannot be held liable for third party content, precisely because they do not censor. If these companies want to continue to enjoy such enormous legal privilege, they can’t suddenly change the terms and conditions of that agreement.
If they do, then the American people should start demanding that social media platforms be held accountable to the same legal standards that traditional media publishers are.
Shana Goldberg may be reached at [email protected].
