This thread is @magnetofsnatch's angst. Is he a leftie? You may be missing the plot in your trolling attempt.
The Biden administration pressured them to stop what they saw as misinformation that was counter to the interest of public health. Facebook didn't comply, they weren't forced to comply, and they weren't retaliated against (at least that Zuckerberg mentioned). So what's the problem? Are you all just upset because it's related to COVID? What if the government pressured (not forced) social media companies to stop promoting content where kids eat Tide Pods because it's killed hundreds of children? Is that ok or not?
News flash. Every admin asks for some type of censorship. The Trump admin did it as well as Obama. Why wasn't OP complaining about the Trump admin when they did it?
Just fyi, conservatives brought up the former president on this thread. And continue to mention him. As you just did.
I am all for free speech, but the misinformation that gets spread via social media is dangerous in many cases. Free speech has limits. I'm not sure where the line is, but I'm thankful that Biden and crew were pushing back on some the crap that was going around regarding COVID.
This is timely: (2) House Judiciary GOP on X: "Mark Zuckerberg just admitted three things: 1. Biden-Harris Admin "pressured" Facebook to censor Americans. 2. Facebook censored Americans. 3. Facebook throttled the Hunter Biden laptop story. Big win for free speech. https://t.co/ALlbZd9l6K" / X (twitter.com) Mark Zuckerberg just admitted three things: 1. Biden-Harris Admin "pressured" Facebook to censor Americans. 2. Facebook censored Americans. 3. Facebook throttled the Hunter Biden laptop story. Big win for free speech. Lefties okay with this crapola are out of your minds and into anti-democracy/anti US Republic lunacy.
I'm pretty sure it was during the time when Zuckerberg spoke to Congress and when the SCOTUS ruled on the issue
What a fallacious summary! Let's consider the broader context. The government has a fundamental duty to protect its people, especially during public health crises like the COVID-19 pandemic. Abdicating this responsibility could lead to even greater harm if dangerous misinformation from domestic and foreign agents is allowed to spread unchecked. The Supreme Court has ruled the government is allowed to flag potentially harmful or baseless content to social media platforms. However, the platforms have the final say on whether to moderate this content. This creates a balance between public safety and the independence of private companies. SCOTUS explicitly recognized that this process does not infringe on free speech. The government isn’t censoring content and any misclassification of misinformation may be addressed by the private entities. Would you rather people die as a result of misinformation to protect companies from getting poor misinformation guidance from the government?
Then why does Reuters have it at the top of their news feed? See the date that the letter was dated. https://www.reuters.com/technology/...ured-meta-censor-covid-19-content-2024-08-27/ In a letter dated Aug. 26, Zuckerberg told the U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary Committee that he regretted not speaking up about this pressure earlier, as well as other decisions he had made as the owner of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp around removing certain content.
My point is this is not news. It's been known for a couple years now about the government asking social media to take down posts. There was already a SCOTUS ruling on it
1. Pressured, not forced, which is a huge distinction 2. Americans are censored on every social media site, every day, including Truth Social 3. Who was running the White House when the Hunter laptop story came out? Maybe try devoting just 1% of your perpetual outrage toward your own party every once in a while and people may take you seriously instead of claiming people are out of their minds for not being outraged at something that really isn't a scandal.
Where was the outrage from MAGA when the Orange Messiah asked Twitter to take down some Chrissy Tegan posts? At the end of the day the WH of either party has the right to ask for a post to be taken down
