I am surprised this made it to SCOTUS. When the government is demanding it, it becomes a 1st amendment issue. Meta is acting as an agent of the government. This should have never happened.
I’ll probably regret this but…
There is a difference between “please delist things telling people to drink bleach to cure covid” and “remove this negative story of the government or else”
This kind of harkens back to the idea of shouting fire in a crowded theater. Misinformation, specifically about pandemics, or alluding threats against officials, can lead to a much larger issue.
Even Kavanaugh states that it is not uncommon for these requests to be denied by social media companies.
This does not cross into first amendment issues because the government is protesting the spread of misinformation, threats, or government secrets, but can very rarely compel something.
In your post, you mentioned Meta. Meta choosing to accept the government concerns is acceptable as Meta is a corporation enacting its own will. In particular, Meta chose to help stop the spread of misinformation in order to benefit society. Which sounds really wierd to say about Meta. It’s the bare minimum, but still.
If you told Meta they aren’t allowed to stop the spread of misinformation, you’d be then restricting the ability of a corporation to stop the spread of things such as hate speech, calls for violence, etc. Which a corporation could then be found liable for.
Meta as a corporation, has chosen to moderate that information, and users have agreed to that moderation when they chose to use Meta’s platform.
The difference is through the government or by choice.
That’s why it’s a 1st amendment issue. If it wasn’t coming with pressure from the White House. It wouldn’t be an issue.
deleted by creator
if they ask social media companies to voluntarily do various things to promote the public’s interest in truthful information.
They threatened the companies if they did not comply. That is what the lawsuit is about.
deleted by creator
My biggest concern is that your view has the First Amendment hamstringing the federal government in significant ways in the most important time periods
Good. That’s the fucking point of it and worthless rats like her who can’t see it shouldn’t be running the show.
deleted by creator
Sure. The government is free to speak it’s own stance on its own platform. Can’t you people who just want to blindly worship whatever the government says stick to watching cspan or whatever and fuck off of private platforms?
deleted by creator
Like when Biden said you can’t catch Covid if you are vaccinated? Or you won’t die? Both are false. Or when fauci said cloth mask are effective ? They are not.
That’s why an open debate is important. People need to be informed and able to have effective conversations about the topic.
deleted by creator
You’re talking about the content of what the government is asking. I’m asking about the act of asking itself, as was Justice Jackson
Yes. The act of asking is itself the problem. Justices should not be asking questions of whether or not we should discard the constitution just because it makes her political masters have a hard time enacting their garbage.
I didn’t believe anything. The science shows they don’t work. They isn’t a belief. That’s a fact. Studies before the pandemic showed that to be true, studies during the pandemic showed that to be true and studies after the pandemic came to the same conclusion.
Fauci even admitted he knew he was lying.
I get you people like 1984 but we don’t need to make it how we run our country.
Fuck each and every shitstain politician who knowingly let her onto the court