Shed partisan glasses in reading Meta letter

Meta founder-CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s letter to the United States (US) House Judiciary Committee that says the Joe Biden administration “pressured” the digital giant to “censor” content on its platforms, including Facebook, has been weaponised by the Republicans in the election season. The Republicans have long claimed that social media companies have been colluding with liberal political persuasions and censoring conservative voices, and Zuckerberg’s letter of “regret” would certainly help such claims.

Donald Trump has predictably used the letter to target not just Joe Biden but also his deputy Kamala Harris, the challenger to Trump in the upcoming presidential elections. However, there are too many dimensions underlying the contents of Zuckerberg’s letter that resist the Republicans’ “bare-bones” reading of a government-coerced social-media censorship regime. Platforms certainly have been under pressure to take down misinformation and fake news, especially relating to Covid. But it is also a fact that the US Supreme Court, in a 6-3 majority verdict earlier this summer, ruled that the White House and federal agencies can continue to urge social media platforms to censor content that the government deems misinformation. Given six of the nine Supreme Court judges were appointed by Republican presidents, with three appointed by Trump, the debate on social media censorship should move away from a mere partisan focus to more weighty questions of protection of free speech and regulation of the unbridled power of the platforms (with little underlying responsibility).

Unlock a world of Benefits with HT! From insightful newsletters to real-time news alerts and a personalized news feed – it’s all here, just a click away! –Login Now!