Controversy trails motivation of President Donald Trump’s executive order, signed Thursday, targeting social networks such as Twitter and Facebook.
The order comes after Twitter labeled the president’s tweets about mail-in ballots for containing “potentially misleading information.”
The order instructs the Commerce Department to ask the Federal Communications Commission to call a rule-making proceeding to rethink Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act from 1996.
This Act protects online platforms from liability for content posted by users. It also gave the Federal Trade Commission responsibility for investigating complaints of political bias and determining if tech companies’ content moderation policies conflict with their pledges for neutrality.
Trump relies more on Twitter to push out his messages. But Twitter’s effrontery to fact check his tweet was reportedly considered a personal attack.
Trump said during the signing that social media companies aren’t “neutral platforms,” adding that Twitter becomes an “editor with a viewpoint” when it bans accounts, edits or takes down posts.
The executive order therefore seeks to clarify a federal law that shields online companies from liability for content posted by users.
But Twitter’s fact-checking of Trump’s tweets have reignited a debate about whether they’re neutral platforms or publishers.
The White House said tech bias is a major issue facing American democracy. “It challenges the free exchange of ideas and public debate that protects our civil liberties. Every citizen—liberal, conservative, or otherwise—has a right to be heard and treated fairly online.”
“The censorship and bias is a threat to freedom itself,” Trump said. He added that, “Imagine if your phone company silenced or edited your conversation. Social media companies have vastly more power and more reach than any phone company in the United States.”
Jack Dorsey, Twitter boss had said on Wednesday that labeling Trump’s tweets doesn’t make Twitter an “arbiter of truth.” Trump’s tweets, he said, might “mislead people into thinking they don’t need to register to get a ballot.”
“We’ll continue to point out incorrect or disputed information about elections globally. And we will admit to and own any mistakes we make,” he said.
“Clicking on Twitter’s label brings you to a page with tweets from news outlets that state mail-in ballots are rarely linked to voter fraud and that Trump’s claims are “unsubstantiated.”
Trump also reportedly falsely stated in his tweets that California will send mail-in ballots to “anyone living in the state, no matter who they are or how they got there.” Only registered voters will receive ballots.
Reactions to Executive order
Michael Kleinman, director of Amnesty International’s Silicon Valley Initiative, called Trump’s executive order “disturbing.”
“Threats and retaliation against platforms that are performing the simple act of fact-checking are all the more disturbing by an administration that continues to attack the media and journalists for performing the vital task of speaking truth to power. The President is not the decider of truth. Continuing to exploit prejudice is dangerous and irresponsible.”
Michael Kleinman
A Google spokeswoman said the company’s content policies have no political bias. “We have clear content policies and we enforce them without regard to political viewpoint,”
The spokeswoman said. “Our platforms have empowered a wide range of people and organizations from across the political spectrum, giving them a voice and new ways to reach their audiences.
“Undermining Section 230 in this way would hurt America’s economy and its global leadership on internet freedom.”
Facebook said it was a platform for diverse views and that its rules apply to everyone.
“Repealing or limiting section 230 will have the opposite effect. It will restrict more speech online, not less.
“By exposing companies to potential liability for everything that billions of people around the world say, this would penalize companies that choose to allow controversial speech and encourage platforms to censor anything that might offend anyone,” a Facebook spokesperson said in a statement.
Ajit Pai, chairman of FCC said in a statement that, “This debate is an important one. The Federal Communications Commission will carefully review any petition for rulemaking filed by the Department of Commerce.”
Kate Ruane, ACLU senior legislative counsel said before the executive order was signed that, “This order, if issued, would be a blatant and unconstitutional threat to punish social media companies that displease the president.”
