SARASOTA – According to a survey by the National Research Group when it comes to the 2020 elections, the majority of Americans are concerned about the threat of misinformation on social media.
The survey further found some Americans believe social media companies are justified in fact checking posts of politicians.
“Clarity with respect to of moderation and any restriction or censorship is very important as is consistency in the enforcement or application, said Frank Alcock.
In the case of whether social media sites have the right to censor what is essentially our first amendment right a new legislative bill looks to hold big tech companies accountable.
This after some argue that sites like Twitter and Facebook are biased when censoring our posts.
“You have these big platforms censoring conservative speech and there’s a ton of examples to lay that out there, they’re not doing that to Democrats,” said Rep. Greg Steube.
Leading up to the 2020 presidential election, the nation’s major social media platforms said that they were prepared for the tidal wave of lies and misleading information.
Which prompted sites such as Facebook and Twitter to begin censoring or flagging posts without being sued for violating our constitutional first amendment rights.
They’re allowed to do so under Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, which provides a legal “safe harbor” for internet companies by exempting them from liability for the material users post on their networks.
“If you have a platform that allows for the exercise and exchange of ideas it should be the free exercise and expression of ideas and not only the ideas that they like,” said Rep. Steube.
Steube, the District 17 FL Representative, joins the growing list of Republicans calling for big tech companies to be held accountable by bringing reform to Section 230. The draft legislation focuses on two areas of reform to balance the outdated immunity of Section 230.
“The role of the big tech companies as referees in our social media platforms is really, really important, and your seeing different constituencies exchange and trying to frame the problems differently.” said Alcock.
Alcock, a Political Science professor at New College of Florida, says before we strip these tech giants immunity we need to address repercussions that comes in doing so.
“If you remove immunity or protection they’re going to be even more disposed to move in a direction of increasing censorship,” said Alcock.
Changes Republicans want to see to Section 230 would include seeing the criteria that constitutes content-moderation, being consistent with those terms, and to not restrict access to material flagged
“If you have that blatant violation of shutting down free expression of speech in our first amendment rights,” said Steube. “I certainly think that individuals should have the ability to file an action against them for shutting down those rights.”
Steube says the reform republicans want to see to section 230 won’t be discussed for this congressional session but rather the next time congress assembles.
