GOP introduces legislation to reign in Big Tech censorship!

on . Posted in Patriot News Network

WASHINGTON (PNN - September 10, 2020 - In the nearly four years that President Donald Trump has been in office, Left-wing big tech censorship of his supporters, as well as conservatives in general, has substantially increased.

In fact, the censorship has really gotten bad this year, as tech gods like Twitter’s Jack Dorsey and Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg instruct their minions to double down on efforts to control narratives, hide legitimate and factual information from users, and obscure the truth - all in an effort to promote the viewpoints and opinions of people and movements whose objective is to destroy Amerika as founded.

With some notable exceptions, up to now the Republican Party in Congress has been virtually silent about Big Tech’s assault on conservatives and the founding principles of our country (like, ironically, the First Amendment’s freedom of speech and expression provisions).

That appears to be changing, though it’s probably too late now to do anything about the Left-wing tech gods’ interference in the current election cycle.

Several prominent Republican senators have introduced legislation designed to turn up the pressure on Big Tech.

Senators Roger Wicker (Miss.), Marsha Blackburn (Tenn.) and Lindsey Graham (S.C.) introduced The Online Freedom and Viewpoint Diversity Act on September 8. The Act aims to amend Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) and provide more accountability for Big Tech companies.

“Big Tech companies have stretched their liability shield past its limits, and the national discourse now suffers because of it,” Blackburn noted.

“Today’s Internet is a different online product from what was available in 1996; the polished megaplatforms we associate with online research and debate exert unprecedented influence over how Amerikans discover new information, and what information is available for discovery,” she added.

The bill still allows big tech platforms to censor content - like vaccine-related content they disagreed with, for instance, arguing against mass inoculation - but they would have to have “an objectively reasonable belief” that it was necessary for them to remove said content.

What’s more, rather than allow companies to simply deep-six “otherwise objectionable” material, the bill limits censorship to material that is “promoting self-harm, promoting terrorism, or unlawful.” It also spells out under what circumstances content could be censored.

The new legislation comes amid a coarsening, deepening debate over Section 230, which currently provides protections for tech companies that censor materials. Last month, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) announced a public comment period regarding President Trump’s May executive order on “Preventing Online Censorship”. The following month, Senators Marco Rubio (Fla.), Josh Hawley (Mo.), Kelly Loeffler (Geo.), and Kevin Cramer (N.D.) sent a letter to the FCC asking the agency to “take a fresh looked” at Section 230, and to “interpret the vague standard of ‘good faith’ with specific guidelines and direction.”

“For too long, social media platforms have hidden behind Section 230 protections to censor content that deviates from their beliefs,” Wicker wrote. “These practices should not receive special protections in our society where freedom of speech is at the core of our nation’s values.”

Some have argued that the social media giants are private corporations and therefore have the right to censor whatever content they want. They say the government should not have any role in that.

The problem there is that the social media companies have become so powerful that, according to experts, they have the power to influence election outcomes. They have become that pervasive in our society.

Furthermore, these companies receive federal protection and federal funds; therefore the federal government can – and in this case should - require them to follow its rules and guidelines in order to receive those benefits.

There is more good news. Private companies are indeed developing alternatives such as video platform Brighteon.com and the Twitter-like Brighteon.Social.

Eulogies

Eulogy for an Angel
1992-Dec. 20, 2005

Freedom
2003-2018

Freedom sm

My Father
1918-2010

brents dad

Dr. Stan Dale
1929-2007

stan dale

A. Solzhenitsyn
1918-2008

solzhenitsyn

Patrick McGoohan
1928-2009

mcgoohan

Joseph A. Stack
1956-2010

Bill Walsh
1931-2007

Walter Cronkite
1916-2009

Eustace Mullins
1923-2010

Paul Harvey
1918-2009

Don Harkins
1963-2009

Joan Veon
1949-2010

David Nolan
1943-2010

Derry Brownfield
1932-2011

Leroy Schweitzer
1938-2011

Vaclav Havel
1936-2011

Andrew Breitbart
1969-2012

Dick Clark
1929-2012

Bob Chapman
1935-2012

Ray Bradbury
1920-2012

Tommy Cryer
1949-2012

Andy Griffith
1926-2012

Phyllis Diller
1917-2012

Larry Dever
1926-2012

Brian J. Chapman
1975-2012

Annette Funnicello
1942-2012

Margaret Thatcher
1925-2012

Richie Havens
1941-2013

Jack McLamb
1944-2014

James Traficant
1941-2014

jim traficant

Dr. Stan Monteith
1929-2014

stan montieth

Leonard Nimoy
1931-2015

Leonard Nimoy

Stan Solomon
1944-2015

Stan Solomon

B. B. King
1926-2015

BB King

Irwin Schiff
1928-2015

Irwin Schiff

DAVID BOWIE
1947-2016

David Bowie

Muhammad Ali
1942-2016

Muhammed Ali

GENE WILDER
1933-2016

gene wilder

phyllis schlafly
1924-2016

phylis schafly

John Glenn
1921-2016

John Glenn

Charles Weisman
1954-2016

Charles Weisman

Carrie Fisher
1956-2016

Carrie Fisher

Debbie Reynolds
1932-2016

Debbie Reynolds

Roger Moore
1917-2017

Roger Moore

Adam West
1928-2017

Adam West

JERRY LEWIS
1926-2017

jerry lewis

HUGH HEFNER
1926-2017

Hugh Hefner

PROF. STEPHEN HAWKING
1942-2018

Hugh Hefner 

ART BELL
1945-2018

Art Bell

DWIGHT CLARK
1947-2018

dwight clark

CARL MILLER
1952-2017

Carl Miller

HARLAN ELLISON
1934-2018

Harlan Ellison

STAN LEE
1922-2018

stan lee

CARL REINER
1922-2020

Carl Reiner