by Greg Piper
When The Supreme Court has lifted the interim injunction against several federal agencies and officials for “coercing”[ing] or significantly encourage[ing] “decisions regarding content moderation on the platform” – stated the ideologically hybrid majority well-documented federal pressure for censorship it was unlikely that narratives unfavourable to the government would be repeated.
Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Justices Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas, scolded his colleagues for their perceived gullibility. The Supreme Court had just provided “an attractive model for future officials who want to control what people say, hear, and think,” he wrote.
The Biden administration, which top Democratic senator says communications with tech platforms have resumed “at about the same time” oral argument in SCOTUScan implement this model – and it has its companions in the European Union and Canada.
The White House recently appointed a censorship spokesman an office known for repeatedly issuing marching orders to social media platforms about content the White House doesn’t like, and then intimidating them for resisting or moving too slowly AND not giving President Biden preferential treatment.
Andy Volosky said he joined The White House on July 8, leaving the progressive consulting firm Middle Seat, which has been he was still listed as “Senior Social and SMS Strategist”.
However, he did not specify his position in the White House and removed his LinkedIn profile – still connected to his personal website – After Fox News reported that Volosky was named deputy director in the Office of Digital Strategy. The report noted Volosky’s essay, which spurred enthusiasm for blacklisting then-President Trump from major social media platforms in January 2021.
[TWEET SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN DELETED]
Volosky’s views are similar to those of Rob “Are you guys serious?” Flahertywho led the office as White House censorship pressures on platforms intensified, exposed by leaks, lawsuits and congressional subpoenas. Flaherty he left last summer stay deputy director of Joe Biden’s re-election campaign.
Professor of Law at George Washington University Jonathan Turley said Republican presidential candidate Trump failed to live up to his responsibilities by not making “free speech a central issue” in the campaign and now must force President Biden to “defend his overwhelmingly anti-freedom record.”
Last week, the EU Commissioner for Internal Market Thierry Breton threatened X with a fine and “require significant changes” to Elon Musk’s platform in order to repurpose its user verification system to “defraud users” and “violate their rights”[n]”Digital Services Act”.
Musk responded by accusing the EU offering X an “illegal secret deal” — with no fines if it secretly began censoring users — which he said X rejected but other platforms accepted. Breton said The EU has done nothing more than “offer commitments” “to resolve the matter” and was unfazed by Musk’s threat to reveal the alleged deal in court.
Justin Trudeau’s administration in Canada plans to allocate C$201 million over five years to establish and run “Digital Security Commission, Commissioner for Human Rights and Office” with 330 full-time employees to enforce the proposed Online Harms Act. Anti-censorship group Reclaim the Net has marked the estimated cost last week.
A celebrated psychologist Jordan Peterson and The Handmaid’s Tale author Margaret Atwood They warned bill (C-63) would criminalize wrong thinking. The bill introduced in February was only second reading in the House of Commons a month ago, where the attorney general Arif Virani said that “the best parts have been adapted” similar laws in the UK, Australia, Germany, France and the EU.
A novel federal employee, Volosky was working for a social media marketing firm as a research and insights analyst when the platforms banned or indefinitely suspended Trump for what Volosky called “his encouragement of an attempted armed insurrection” at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.
His January 12, 2021, essay praised those actions, as well as decisions by Google and Apple to “restrict” free-speech-friendly apps Parler and Gab in their app stores and Amazon for removing the Parler app “from its servers, and therefore the internet,” calling those steps “nice steps” — and not enough.
“What took them so long?” Volosky asked rhetorically, questioning whether the platforms were “committed to this new way forward,” noting that Twitter does not touch the accounts of other governments and world leaders who exploit it for “propaganda as a cover for autocracy.”
While he acknowledged there is a “real concern” about broader censorship due to the lack of transparency in how platforms treat “abstractions” and “hyperbole” versus concrete threats, “[i]“It is clearer than ever that social media platforms need to moderate extremist content… have the resources and expertise to do so” and must take “even more robust measures… in the very near future,” Volosky wrote.
With Democrats in control of Congress and the White House “for the first time in a decade” and their recent history of advocating for “drastic steps” to curb Big Tech, “it’s initially scary” for his field, Volosky said. But if regulations make people “feel more comfortable sharing their lives on social media,” social workers will have a better job.
Volosky did not respond to Only news questions directed to his X account, which he last updated with a “new job” on July 8, and the White House Office did not respond to an email.
Before the EU Commissioner for Competition Margrethe Vestager added to Breton’s unclear post Friday morning in formal letter to XIt was not clear what had provoked the Internal Market Commissioner beyond almost two years of repeated, sarcastic exchanges with Musk.
Political a few days earlier he had submitted a probably compromising report for the EU about how Musk’s SpaceX is saving European satellites from the EU’s uncertain, heavily subsidized space program, to which Breton responded with calls for protectionism and more subsidies.
“In the past, #BlueChecks meant reliable sources of information,” Breton said, former telecom executive long accused of conflict of interesthe wrote on X, referring to the badge that Twitter unilaterally awarded to certain high-profile users before Musk purchased the company.
Here are some examples of information provided by bluecheck: https://t.co/YXVROZvcqj photo: twitter.com/qK0ySb7a1E
— Jonatan Pallesen (@jonatanpallesen) July 12, 2024
X now awards a badge to paid subscribers, which made him a target of the disinformation police including the Anti-Hate Center, which advised counterterrorism officials in the Biden administration and which one X unsuccessfully sued for “misleading research” which scared away advertisers.
As Breton said, X can defend itself, but the EU’s “preliminary” position is that the badge’s changed purpose violates the DSA. The Act, which came into force only in Februaryaims to “prevent illegal and harmful activities on the Internet and the spread of disinformation.”
Musk and other X users responded by mocking Breton. The journalist Twitter Files Michael Shellenberger called it a “totalitarian threat”“and venture capitalists Mike Solana called Breton “yet another European Nazi who wants censorship.” An account that follows X-related news indicates that its rival Metawhich includes Facebook and Instagram, has a similar paid badge.
Vestager’s letter said the revised verification ID “does not align with industry practice,” X does not provide “required transparency around advertising,” and the company “does not provide researchers access to its public data,” as required by the DSA.
– – –
Greg Piper is a reporter for Just the News.
