Former President Donald Trump announced a class-action lawsuit against social media giants Twitter, Facebook, and Google. The lawsuit will also target the CEOs of these corporations including Jack Dorsey, Mark Zuckerberg, and Sundar Pichai. Trump alleges that the nearly unilateral bans of his accounts on those social media platforms following the January 6th drama are a violation of free speech. Critics may pan this announcement as Trump being self-serving, but the former President mentioned the censorship of conservative voices in general.
The lawsuit also seeks to get answers on who is actually behind the censorship of conservative figures and “controversial” ideas on social media. Is it strictly the social media platforms making decisions on their own, is it the Government forcing the hand of social media platforms to do their bidding, or is it a combination of all of the above?
If the US Government is forcing social media corporations to bend to their will and censor certain subjects that are not illegal, then this is a clear violation of the First Amendment. The concept of freedom of speech may be murky to some but a clear violation of it is when the Government interferes with legal language.
There is also the possibility of social media giants colluding with the Federal Government to attack common political enemies. Donald Trump is a clear example of this scenario being totally possible. Trump was universally loathed by far-leftist figures, many of whom operate in high-level positions of power. These people could be very influential inside and outside of social media companies like Twitter. And if they have the power to somehow… muzzle Donald Trump, then they may just try.
Several news outlets point out that Trump may not go through with the lawsuit because he’s threatened legal action before and didn’t follow through. Others say he is trying to deflect from the incidents of January 6th. The truth is that Trump is being censored unfairly. Liberal politicians, such as Stacey Abrams, have made statements similar to Trump about her own election. She has not been booted from Twitter or any other social media platform. Vice President Kamala Harris retweeted a bail fund for riotous protesters in Milwaukee during the George Floyd drama. Obviously, no ban there.
Twitter, Facebook, and Google dominate communication. Many people get their news exclusively through the window that these social media giants provide for the general public. They don’t look too far beyond the confines of the window to find anything else. Here’s an example. Thing “A” gets promoted over and over on social media and television 24/7. Thing “B” doesn’t get much promotion at all… but maybe it does get some media attention. Which “thing” will be the most widely believed and known about, even if a retraction to that thing were issued a year later?
Section 230 of the Communications Deceny Act states that platforms shall not be liable for user-uploaded content. This would, in theory, protect platforms like Twitter from lawsuits due to content on their platform. The problem is that these corporations are apparently curating and king-making. This process is simply called “publishing”. That removes places like Twitter and Facebook from their coveted Section 230 protection. If this happens, then the platforms are doomed. So they will eventually need to stop curating and publishing, therefore *censoring* content if they don’t want to go the way of the Dodo Bird.
SOURCES:
Watch Live: Donald Trump Announces Lawsuit Against Jack Dorsey, Mark Zuckerberg
Trump files suit against Facebook, Twitter and YouTube
Donald Trump files sweeping, nonsensical lawsuits against Facebook, Twitter, and Google – The Verge
Donald Trump files lawsuit against CEOs of Facebook and Twitter
#BREAKING: Trump to sue Facebook, Twitter, Google CEOs – YouTube
Trump sues Facebook, Google, Twitter, Dorsey, Zuckerberg, Pichai
Trump accuses Big Tech of working with Democrats to CENSOR Republicans – YouTube
