by Matthew Russell - Posted 4 years ago
The nation is still being rocked by recent protests. It feels like a horribly written story out there. It doesn’t seem to make sense. Overshadowed by all of this is the newest Executive Order issued on 5/28/20.
I have heard a lot on Social Media condemning censoring social media and dismissing it as pure posturing, or simply illegal. As soon as I heard about it, I wanted to do my due diligence and look into it and let you know exactly what it entails.
I have taken the text directly from the White House release found here at www.whitehouse.gov
Free speech is the bedrock of American democracy. Our Founding Fathers protected this sacred right with the First Amendment to the Constitution. The freedom to express and debate ideas is the foundation for all of our rights as a free people.
This section further outlines the problem and it isn’t exactly what you think. Places such as Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube are blocking certain views and allowing others to push through.
As a defendant of the Freedom of Speech, I believe that everyone’s views are valid and should not be blocked or pushed aside in favor of others. Social Media platforms should not push any view over another. Stay out of it and let people decide for themselves what they want to see and read.
Selective Censorship is damaging to the credibility of our Nation.
It is the policy of the United States to foster clear ground rules promoting free and open debate on the internet. Prominent among the ground rules governing that debate is the immunity from liability created by section 230(c) of the Communications Decency Act (section 230(c)). 47 U.S.C. 230(c). It is the policy of the United States that the scope of that immunity should be clarified: the immunity should not extend beyond its text and purpose to provide protection for those who purport to provide users a forum for free and open speech, but in reality, use their power over a vital means of communication to engage in deceptive or pretextual actions stifling free and open debate by censoring certain viewpoints.
So basically, they are just clarifying a former Order that social Media Platforms are hiding behind. If an online platform buries content in favor of content of another view, it is no longer simply a free for all social media platform but a publisher. This is key to the rest of the Executive Order.
This pertains directly to Civil Liability and acting in “good-faith” on behalf of the general public.
The only content that this now covers is the censorship of adult or mature content to minors.
The head of each executive department and agency (agency) shall review its agency’s Federal spending on advertising and marketing paid to online platforms. Such review shall include the amount of money spent, the online platforms that receive Federal dollars, and the statutory authorities available to restrict their receipt of advertising dollars.
Basically, if you are receiving Federal Funding, act like it. The Government will sit down for the next 30 days to decide what they will be spending their money on. This makes sense to me personally.
If I am going to be spending money on various things such as ad space, data analytics, or anything else accountability matters.
Yes, data analytics is a touchy topic. Our own CEO Jared Brague will start yelling out that this is a conspiracy theory. There is so much information out there on both sides of the fence that I won’t get into it here.
Either way you go, if the government is turning to these larger businesses, they had better be equal with their disbursement of content.
It is the policy of the United States that large online platforms, such as Twitter and Facebook, as the critical means of promoting the free flow of speech and ideas today, should not restrict protected speech. The Supreme Court has noted that social media sites, as the modern public square, “can provide perhaps the most powerful mechanisms available to a private citizen to make his or her voice heard.”
This is a long one. Basically treat social media as a “public forum” where anyone can speak up or speak out.
There are new online places where you can report censorship. I want you all to keep in mind, that just because your opinion may be unpopular, that doesn’t mean that it is being censored.
For example; let’s say 100 people go into a room to discuss something openly. 99 of them agree that the Option “A” is the best course of action. The remaining person says Option “B” is the better way. If everyone is talking at once, not many people will hear that one person. They are not being censored, just unheard.
Now if you go on social media and say your opinion, it could get drowned out by other opinions. Simple SEO (Search Engine Optimization) may push your post to the bottom. This doesn’t mean that YouTube and by extension Google, or FaceBook are censoring you. You don’t need to report this.
If YouTube and by extension, Google, or FaceBook take your opinion and purposely do not share them due to the fact that they disagree, report the crap out of it.
The Attorney General shall establish a working group regarding the potential enforcement of State statutes that prohibit online platforms from engaging in unfair or deceptive acts or practices. The working group shall also develop model legislation for consideration by legislatures in States where existing statutes do not protect Americans from such unfair and deceptive acts and practices. The working group shall invite State Attorneys General for discussion and consultation, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law.
This is another long one. Basically, it states that the federal government will sit down and decide how to take appropriate action against those that censor user-based content.
It takes into account various algorithms (that is the SEO that I mentioned earlier), user-interaction, and various other reasons. This is where the fact-checking comes into play.
I state something that is true and typical SEO pushes that aside, no big deal. If I state something true and social media refuses to share this, ouch.
Well, for starters, your favorite online comic marketplace is going to be just fine. Yes, we have some political comics on our platform. If an opposition decides to create one that goes against the views of the other creators, then no problem. We show those too.
We do not censor anyone for any reason unless it goes against the policy of Mature or Adult Content. If you aren’t old enough, you won’t see it. If you are old enough and don’t want to see it, we have a button to not show it. That is how adults can be on our site while at work (that is a “not safe for work” joke...I’m sorry, not all my jokes go over well).
We've been down this road before with other online policy changes such as the CCPA compliance, ComicsGate, and the infamous Danny Cate's Twitter Rant. We aren't changing and that makes us exceptional!
I’m still not sure how other platforms such as Twitter or FaceBook will handle this, but as for us, don’t worry. I bet anything, Frey and I are going to get heated about this on the CryptoComics Couch tonight. (FYI, join us live on your favorite social media platform as we discuss all things comics.)
This seems like the perfect time to plug our new uploading system. Go on, upload a comic that you think goes against the grain. Publish it to our site and watch it flourish. Until next time, read more comics!
