Authoritarian Tech Control | Government Urged Tech firms to Silence User Speech
The relationship between the U.S. government and Facebook, one of the world's most influential social media platforms, has been marked by controversy and significant implications for democracy, human rights, and free expression.
Historically, Facebook has engaged in direct and indirect cooperation with governments worldwide to censor or moderate content. For instance, the company custom-built censorship tools for the Chinese government, blocked dissident accounts, offered user data from Hong Kong to China, and even misled the U.S. Congress about these actions [1]. Facebook's content moderation efforts have also been criticized for enabling ethnic violence, such as in Sri Lanka and Ethiopia, where the platform was accused of being slow or ineffective in removing inflammatory content that fueled real-world violence [2].
Moreover, former government intelligence officers, including ex-CIA agents, have reportedly influenced content policies at major social media companies like Facebook, contributing to what some perceive as government-directed censorship of private citizens' speech via blacklisting or "deboosting" of certain topics [3]. This raises concerns that private platform moderation increasingly aligns with government priorities, blurring lines between state censorship and private content governance.
Facebook's Oversight Board, established to enforce content standards that balance freedom of expression with global human rights principles, has faced criticism over its effectiveness and impartiality [4].
The implications of this collaboration are far-reaching. There is a risk of undermining democratic discourse by suppressing dissent and politically sensitive information. Increased surveillance and privacy violations through data sharing with repressive regimes are also a concern. The lack of transparency in much government-platform cooperation poses challenges to accountability. Legal and ethical dilemmas regarding free speech rights on private platforms operating globally are another issue. The potential normalization of state influence over online speech under the guise of combating misinformation, hate speech, or violence is a cause for alarm.
Recently, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed a lawsuit brought by Children's Health Defense against Meta Platforms (Facebook's parent company) for restricting their posts, fundraising, and advertising on Facebook [5]. Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Meta, has admitted that Facebook conspired with the government to censor individuals expressing views about the COVID-19 pandemic that were deemed "disapproved" [6].
The First Amendment prohibits the government from working through private companies to evade the amendment's protection of free speech. However, the Supreme Court has avoided ruling on whether states can pass laws to prohibit censorship by Big Tech companies on social media platforms such as Facebook, TikTok, and YouTube [7].
In a 6-3 ruling in Murthy v. Missouri, the Supreme Court sidestepped a challenge to the federal government's efforts to coerce social media companies into censoring users' First Amendment expression [8]. A federal court in Louisiana ruled that executive branch officials cannot communicate with social media companies about controversial content in their online forums [9].
The censorship could potentially extend to any individual or group whose views are deemed politically incorrect, hateful, dangerous, or conspiratorial. Judge Terry Doughty compared the government's attempts to pressure social media companies to suppress content critical of COVID vaccines or the election to an "Orwellian 'Ministry of Truth'" [10].
Ignoring the long-term ramifications of censorship can be dangerously naive, as powers allowed now may be used against individuals in the future. Censorship can eventually lead to silencing truth, and telling the truth may become a revolutionary act.
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/16/technology/facebook-china-censorship-tools.html [2] https://edition.cnn.com/2021/10/21/asia/facebook-myanmar-cambodia-intl/index.html [3] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-facebook-spy-idUSKBN29L27L [4] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/21/technology/facebook-oversight-board-decision.html [5] https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/24/facebook-lawsuit-by-childrens-health-defense-dismissed-by-appeals-court.html [6] https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/exclusive-zuckerberg-admits-facebook-conspired-with-government-to-censor-covid-19-critics-2021-10-19/ [7] https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21a159_6j31.pdf [8] https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20a114_6j31.pdf [9] https://thehill.com/policy/technology/576040-federal-court-rules-against-trump-administration-on-social-media-censorship [10] https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/29/judge-terry-doughty-compares-government-efforts-to-suppress-content-to-an-orwellian-ministry-of-truth.html
- The relationship between independent journalism and technology, particularly social media platforms like Facebook, has become increasingly relevant as they wield significant influence over the dissemination of general-news, politics, and entertainment.
- Concerns about freedom of expression and the truth are raised when artificial intelligence and technology are used for content moderation, as there's a risk of aligning with government priorities and allowing censorship of private citizens' speech.
- Health-related discussions, such as those surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, have been subject to content censorship by social media companies, raising questions about their cooperation with governments and the potential infringement on free speech rights.
- The effectiveness and impartiality of Facebook's Oversight Board, established to balance freedom of expression with human rights principles, have been critically reviewed, adding to the ongoing debate about the role of technology in shaping public discourse.
- The potential undermining of democratic discourse, increased surveillance, privacy violations, and lack of transparency in government-platform collaboration are significant implications that need to be addressed to uphold truth and promote freedom.
- The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed a lawsuit against Meta Platforms (Facebook's parent company), highlighting the ongoing legal and ethical dilemmas surrounding Big Tech companies' censorship on social media, as well as the government's role in such actions.
