White House proposal would have FCC, FTC police alleged social media censorship
cnn.com
cnn.com
I believe that this executive order is being written in bad faith. That is, the purpose is not to protect free speech, but rather to boost holders of certain ideological positions. But how do they write such an executive order without making those who enforce it suffer from cognitive dissonance? Some people get boosted, others get punished or downgraded, all on inconsistent or unstated criteria. This will have unexpected side effects. I'm not sure how I'd respond to such a regime if I was an on-line media company like Youtube or Twitter. They might end up just restricting every body to only the most bland and conformist expressions. They might adopt the Chinese government's "One eye open, one eye shut" style, and occasionally and unpredictably punish some random offender, just to cow everyone else into bland and conformist expression only. Nobody would actually know where the line between "allowed" and "punished" expression, so most people would stay well inside the safe zone. If holders of certain ideologies are allowed to express ideas further from bland and conformist, it won't go down easily. Maybe twitter can police people from saying politely that XXXist's are allowed to post more extreme opinions than YYYist's are and that's not fair, but what's to keep everyone from making that observation on Instagram, or heaven help us, TikTok? Word will get around, and maybe torches and pitchforks will be gathered. Or maybe Twitter will just wind up its business and quit.
We know that it is specifically targeted because it does nothing to address truly biased sources like Fox News.
On the plus side it is so plainly unconstitutional that it will be instantly blocked literally anywhere it is challenged - there's even direct precedence in the Supreme Court, there was an "fairness" rule for news shows that was overturned to allow thinks like Fox News to exist. That one wasn't even horrifically biased and only applied to shows that explicitly stated that they were news and current events.
I'm not so sanguine - our current Supreme Court has 2 rather new members, who are probably not as predictable as those they replaced. Roberts, too, has been less predictable than his predecessor Rehnquist.
Which will be expensive for everyone, hopefully such that even today’s unconstitutionally appointed Supreme Court will day no.