{"id":2284418,"date":"2024-06-27T07:15:01","date_gmt":"2024-06-27T11:15:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/if-feds-want-to-jawbone-big-tech-make-them-do-it-publicly\/"},"modified":"2024-06-27T07:19:40","modified_gmt":"2024-06-27T11:19:40","slug":"if-feds-want-to-jawbone-big-tech-make-them-do-it-publicly","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/if-feds-want-to-jawbone-big-tech-make-them-do-it-publicly\/","title":{"rendered":"If Feds Want To Jawbone Big Tech, Make Them Do It Publicly"},"content":{"rendered":"<aside class=\"mashsb-container mashsb-main mashsb-stretched\"><div class=\"mashsb-box\"><div class=\"mashsb-count mash-medium\" style=\"&quot;\"><div class=\"counts mashsbcount\">24<\/div><span class=\"mashsb-sharetext\">SHARES<\/span><\/div><div class=\"mashsb-buttons\"><a class=\"mashicon-facebook mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservativenewsdaily.net%2Fbreaking-news%2Fif-feds-want-to-jawbone-big-tech-make-them-do-it-publicly%2F\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Facebook<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-twitter mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/intent\/tweet?text=&amp;url=https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=2284418&amp;via=ConservNewsDly\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Twitter<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-subscribe mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"#\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Subscribe<\/span><\/a><div class=\"onoffswitch2 mash-medium mashsb-noshadow\" style=\"display:none\"><\/div><\/div>\n            <\/div>\n                <div style=\"clear:both\"><\/div><\/aside>\n            <!-- Share buttons by mashshare.net - Version: 4.0.47--><p>The Supreme Court&#8217;s decision in Murthy v. Missouri, based\u2062 on standing grounds,\u200c indicates that relief from \u200dgovernment\u200b suppression of speech involving\u2064 private companies like social\u200b media won&#8217;t be provided\u200b by the courts; instead, action needs to come from Congress. The case discusses the government&#8217;s efforts, \u2063including those by Surgegorn General Murthy regarding COVID-19 content on\u2062 <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/the-new-acting-attorney-general-jeff-rosen-recently-wrote-an-essay-on-foreign-influence-in-us-elections-this-tells-us-a-little-about-his-knowledge-of-whats-going-on-today\/\" title=\"The New Acting Attorney General Jeff Rosen Recently Wrote an Essay on Foreign Influence in US Elections \u2013 This Tells Us A Little About His Knowledge of What\u2019s Going On Today\">social media platforms<\/a>, as overreaching forms of censorship\u2063 that oppose American principles of free speech \u200band self-governance. Instances\u2064 such as\u2062 the misinformation surrounding the Hunter Biden laptop scandal exemplify this concerning\u2063 trend of government involvement in controlling or\u2063 silencing information, which risks democratic values. The recommended solution\u200c is for Congress to enact legislation preventing such government \u200cinfluence over social media, with transparency mandates requiring documented \u200cinteractions \u2063between\u200d the \u2062government and private companies to be publicly accessible to ensure accountability and \u200cprevent abuse of power.  <\/p>\n<p class=\"readmore\">\n    <button onclick=\"showReadMore()\" id=\"readmorebtn\">Read more&#8230;<\/button>\n<\/p>\n<hr id=\"line\">\n<span id=\"more\"><\/p>\n<div>\n<p>The Supreme Court\u2019s refusal on standing grounds to reach the merits in <em>Murthy v. Missouri<\/em> has made clear that the remedy for executive branch suppression of speech through private companies will not come from the courts. This means that if you believe as we do that government has no business dictating what information should be censored in the modern-day public square \u2014 <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/state-legislatures-push-to-fight-big-tech-but-experts-warn-of-limitations\/\" title=\"State Legislatures Push to Fight Big Tech, but Experts Warn of Limitations\">social media websites<\/a> \u2014 the remedy lies with Congress.<\/p>\n<p>The very idea of the government silencing American voices online reeks of authoritarianism and undermines the principles of self-government. Social media companies are not extensions of the state. They are private entities with their own terms of service and community guidelines. Any attempt by the government to coerce them into censoring certain information sets a dangerous precedent that threatens the fabric of our society.  <\/p>\n<p><em>Murthy<\/em> is a perfect example of this alarming trend. Surgeon General Murthy\u2019s attempt to force the removal of specific posts related to Covid-19 treatments from social media websites was nothing short of censorship. And we now know for a fact that much of the Covid-related information that the government disapproved of and demanded that <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/ga-poll-watcher-it-expert-non-trump-supporter-affidavit-sudden-surge-of-20000-mail-in-votes-for-biden-in-early-hours-on-nov\/\" title=\"GA Poll Watcher, IT Expert, Non-Trump Supporter Affidavit: Sudden Surge of 20,000 Mail-In-Votes For Biden In Early Hours On Nov\">social media companies<\/a> censor \u2014 for example, the lab-leak hypothesis, the inefficacy of masks, the lack of any scientific basis for the six-foot rule \u2014 was either true or, at a minimum, fairly debatable. <\/p>\n<p>Sadly, this is far from the only example of government coordination with companies to censor certain information or voices. The campaign to censor discussion of the Hunter Biden laptop based on the false claim, recently directly contradicted by an FBI witness at the Biden son\u2019s recent Delaware trial, that the laptop was Russian propaganda, comes to mind. The government should not have the power to <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/facebooks-oversight-board-will-remove-posts-flagged-by-users\/\" title=\"Facebook\u2019s Oversight Board Will Remove Posts Flagged By Users\">silence dissenting voices<\/a> or control the flow of information, especially in the context of politics and elections. <\/p>\n<p>Of course, the best solution would be for Congress to pass a law banning such jawboning entirely.\u00a0But if Congress won\u2019t stop government agencies from meddling in the affairs of social media companies and their users, it should at least impose strict safeguards to prevent abuse of power. We think the most effective safeguard is the simplest:\u00a0Let the sun shine. <\/p>\n<p>To the extent the government wishes to interact with private companies regarding content, it must do so in writing, and it must publish those writings on the web within one week of the interaction.    <\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, any government official who circumvents those requirements, whether by avoiding creating a written record of such interactions or by failing to publish them on a timely basis, should face severe consequences, up to and including the loss of employment. The law should protect those who blow the whistle on any violations, both government employees and employees of any social media company involved.  <\/p>\n<p>It will doubtless be objected that some exceptions will be required to this rule to <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/is-federal-censorship-coming-biden-admin-creating-disinformation-governance-board-report\/\" title=\"Is Federal Censorship Coming? Biden Admin Creating \u2018Disinformation Governance Board\u2019: Report\">protect national security<\/a> or ongoing law enforcement operations or the like.\u00a0To deal with those circumstances, we believe that whatever law Congress passes should include an exception to the requirement of prompt publication for jawboning communications that (a) fit within whatever narrowly drawn exceptions Congress thinks appropriate and (b) have been <em>personally <\/em>certified by the head of the agency in question as being exempt from the prompt publication rule. Requiring personal certification by the head of the agency would ensure both that these exceptions would be rarely invoked and that the agency head in question would be unable, when later questioned by Congress, to claim ignorance of either the underlying communication or the decision to withhold it from publication.  <\/p>\n<p>In addition, any jawboning communications so withheld from public view must be promptly shared with a bipartisan Congressional oversight committee, and the decision to continue withholding them from the general public must be personally recertified by the agency head at regular intervals (we suggest quarterly). <\/p>\n<p>Freedom of speech is not a negotiable commodity; it\u2019s a fundamental right that must be fiercely protected. We cannot allow the government to dictate what we can and cannot say, especially when it comes to online discourse. It\u2019s time to draw a line in the sand and defend our right to speak freely, without fear of censorship or reprisal.  <\/p>\n<hr>\n<p>      Jonathan Shaw is a partner at the Dhillon Law Group. Amber Hulse is a recent graduate of Georgetown Law School, a law clerk at the Dhillon Law Group, and the Republican nominee for South Dakota State Senate District 30.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<p><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The Supreme Court&#8217;s decision in Murthy v. Missouri, based on standing, avoided addressing the merits of executive branch censorship via private companies. This indicates that courts won&#8217;t resolve such suppression of speech. If you agree that the government shouldn&#8217;t control information, this ruling suggests that solutions must come from outside the judicial system<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3262,"featured_media":2284419,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/pexels-magnus-mueller-1398178-2818118.jpeg","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[546],"tags":[23092,6617,32988],"class_list":["post-2284418","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-the-federalist","tag-big-tech","tag-feds","tag-jawbone"],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/pexels-magnus-mueller-1398178-2818118.jpeg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2284418","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3262"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2284418"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2284418\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2284419"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2284418"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2284418"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2284418"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}