(Article by Shane Trejo republished from BigLeaguePolitics.com)
“Members of all three branches of the federal government have expressed serious concerns about the prevailing interpretation of the immunity set forth in Section 230 of the Communications Act. There is bipartisan support in Congress to reform the law. The U.S. Department of Commerce has petitioned the Commission to ‘clarify ambiguities in section 230.’ And earlier this week, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas pointed out that courts have relied upon ‘policy and purpose arguments to grant sweeping protections to Internet platforms’ that appear to go far beyond the actual text of the provision,” FCC Chairman Ajit Pai wrote in a statement.
“As elected officials consider whether to change the law, the question remains: What does Section 230 currently mean? Many advance an overly broad interpretation that in some cases shields social media companies from consumer protection laws in a way that has no basis in the text of Section 230. The Commission’s General Counsel has informed me that the FCC has the legal authority to interpret Section 230. Consistent with this advice, I intend to move forward with a rulemaking to clarify its meaning,” he added.
Pai noted that his clarification of Section 230 is in concordance with his limited government ethos. Section 230 is a bureaucratic regulation set up by big government to allow powerful corporations to shirk liabilities and form monopolies by design.
“Throughout my tenure at the Federal Communications Commission, I have favored regulatory parity, transparency, and free expression. Social media companies have a First Amendment right to free speech. But they do not have a First Amendment right to a special immunity denied to other media outlets, such as newspapers and broadcasters,” Pai wrote.
His official statement can be seen here:
https://twitter.com/AjitPaiFCC/status/1316808733805236226
Pro-Big Brother liberals are now painting themselves as the defenders of the free market and private property in an attempt to protect Silicon Valley’s right to censor. One such shameful example comes from TechDirt, an outlet that opposes Section 230 reform.
“He’s a lying hypocrite with no principles, no backbone, and should be regarded as a complete joke,” TechDirt reporter Mike Masnick wrote in his tantrum about Pai.
“In terms of actual impact, all this will serve to do is rile people up, waste a ton of time, and not actually change anything. Because it can’t. But it will create a huge mess in the meantime, distracting everybody, and wasting a ton of resource,” he added.
Perhaps the public should be riled up about Big Tech censorship since it has emerged as an existential threat to democracy, which Big League Politics has noted:
A day after censoring the New York Post for exposing Hunter Biden’s emails, Twitter has doubled down by censoring a newly published article that explains Hunter’s crony and possibly illicit business dealings with China.
“Twitter is censoring us — again,” announced Post editor Sohrab Ahmari in a tweet.
“This is what I — an editor at America’s oldest continuously published newspaper, founded by Alexander Hamilton — get when I try to post our follow-up story on Hunter’s financial shenanigans with the Chinese regime,” he added.
When Ahmari attempted to post the article, he received a “Tweet Not Sent” notice that read as follows: “Your Tweet could not be sent because this link has been identified by Twitter or our partners as being potentially harmful. Visit our Help Center to learn more.”
The Post report details Hunter’s interactions with a powerful Chinese energy firm. The revelations in the article indicate that Hunter was receiving millions from Chinese interests because of his name. The Biden campaign is attempting to ignore the scandal while the Big Tech overlords attempt to keep the news from going viral.
“There is no need for comment on any so-called information provided by Rudy Giuliani,” Biden lawyer George Mesires said.
“He has been pushing widely discredited conspiracy theories about the Biden family, openly relying on actors tied to Russian intelligence. His record of dishonesty in these matters speaks for itself,” Mesires added.
It is very telling that liberals only support private property and the free market when companies are enacting Draconian censorship and effectively nullifying the 1st Amendment. ISIS has nothing on the Democrat Party when it comes to hostility toward American values.
Read more at: BigLeaguePolitics.com
Please contact us for more information.
