Ted Cruz accused the tech platforms of ‘actively interfering in this election’
The Senate Commerce committee is set to grill the CEOs of Facebook, Twitter and Google on Wednesday amid right-wing accusations of political bias and threats to change a critical law, known as Section 230, that protects the three tech giants’ ability to moderate content as they see fit.
Outside experts have found little evidence to support claims of widespread partisanship on the social media platforms. Still, the conservative allegations are damning claims just days ahead of
Twitter earlier this week banned an article published by the New York Post regarding the son of Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden.
The report was based in part on files and emails that the Post said were taken from Hunter Biden’s laptop.
Twitter’s decision to ban a story published by a conservative-leaning publication without explanation seemed to affirm Republicans’ long-held theory that Big Tech is biased against the right.
The move undermined what Twitter has said is its mission to implement fair moderation policies and limit disinformation on its platform, especially ahead of one of the most important presidential elections in modern US history.
Even the most serious students of the law sometimes get the law wrong. That’s why I’m willing to cut some slack for Justice Clarence Thomas, who took the occasion this week to propose that some plaintiff, somewhere, should bring the right kind of Section 230 case to the Supreme Court. Thomas practically issued an engraved invitation for parties to bring a case that would enable the court to narrow the law that law professor Jeff Kosseff has rightly classified as containing “the 26 words that created the internet”: “No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.”