Regarding the Twitter files and, in particular, White House and FBI flagging content/users. When it rises to a 1A violation depends on whether the government used coercion. And what coercion is from a legal standpoint is not always clearcut, particularly due to a somewhat inconsistent line of cases that Genevieve Lakier nicely summarizes here. https://www.lawfareblog.com/informal-government-coercion-and-problem-jawboning
Everyone should worry if a government official uses the power of federal law enforcement or regulation to coerce a platform to take down speech. At the same time, the government can be a participant in the speech marketplace (including criticizing people). The problem is that we have very blurry lines as to what is acceptable. While more modern 1A lines will emerge with caselaw, this also is something where statutes could play a role in bringing clarity.
One of the strongest potential cases of jawboning comes not from anything we’ve seen in the Twitter files, but from the public statements of some members of Congress over the past few years, threatening to change/repeal 230 unless platforms change how they moderate constitutionally protected speech.
This press release and bill, when accompanied by the senators’ complaints about the disinformatiom dozen, are not great. https://www.klobuchar.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2021/7/klobuchar-luj-n-introduce-legislation-to-hold-digital-platforms-accountable-for-vaccine-and-other-health-related-misinformation
@jkosseff I don't know. I'm so torn on this. While I agree with most of what you present, another other part of me, the humanitarian bent, leans towards the fact that lives are put in jeopardy due to public health disinfo during a pandemic. Is it not possible to have just a little nuance when lives are in such jeopardy?
@progressiveartist Sure it is. But keep in mind that whoever is in power decides that nuance.
Think about who was in power during the pandemic. Would you want them to be able to decide what is and isn't misinformation and have the power to restrict it?
@LouisIngenthron That raises a good point; one for which I haven't a sufficient answer. However, the pandemic is decidedly *not* over. People are still becoming gravely ill and/or dying for political and economic expediency.
Both the former Oaf of Office, and Pres. Biden, the latter of which I voted for, have been/are being egregiously neglectful, and have been/are peddling disinformation in their own unique ways. It feels so dystopian and I'm not satisfied that nothing can be done.