Speech suppression is habit forming | American Institute of Business


Suppression of speech is a habit the Biden administration and its liberal supporters can’t seem to break. Many staff members may have picked up this habit during their college years: Colleges and universities routinely censor “politically incorrect” speech over the past 30 years. Like Remarks by Thomas Sowell, “There are no institutions in America where free speech is more severely restricted than in our politically correct, liberal-dominated colleges and universities.”

Now, the Biden administration appears to be giving colleges and universities some serious competition. Like many Democrats during the Trump presidency, they have come to regard the suppression of “fake news” as the normal course of business and makes it a primary responsibility of social media platforms.

For decades the print and broadcast media have been dominated by the liberals, but Facebook, Google and Twitter have developed a grip on news reporting that goes beyond anything the three broadcasting networks and a few national newspapers have ever enjoyed. If they remove a story or argument, much of it disappears from public view. And to the extent that it persists, it can be branded by these multi-billion dollar companies as “disinformation” or “fake news”.

The suppression of the speeches was exactly what White House press secretary Jen Psaki had in mind last week when she called on Facebook to remove 12 accounts she said were spreading “disinformation” about people. COVID vaccines. These accounts, she said Thursday, “produced 65% of vaccine misinformation on social media platforms.”

“Facebook needs to act faster to remove harmful and abusive posts,” she said. “Messages that would be in their deletion policy often stay online for days, and that’s too long. Information is spreading too quickly.

And she wasn’t targeting her claim just on Facebook. “You shouldn’t be banned from one platform and not from the others,” she added a day later. The message has surely not escaped these companies, whose fabulously successful business models are vulnerable to government disruption.

Like most speech suppressors, Psaki protested against his good intentions. Much like his boss, President Joe Biden, who, when asked on Facebook on Friday, simply said, “They’re killing people. The implication is that any advice contrary to current recommendations from public health officials, contrary to “Science”, is doomed to increase the death toll.

This corresponds more to Cardinal Bellarmine’s vision of science than to that of Galileo. As Galileo knew, science is not the acceptance of the sacred scriptures but the learning of observation and experimentation. Today, in the face of a new and deadly virus, current science is a set of hypotheses that are only partially tested and subject to revision on the basis of emerging evidence.

There is a long list of things once considered “disinformation” about COVID but now widely accepted as true. A prime example: the possibility that the coronavirus was accidentally released from a laboratory in Wuhan. For over a year, this was widely treated as a far-fetched, right-wing conspiracy theory. Facebook slapped “warnings” and bragged about shrinking readership – that is, suppressing speech.

Then, in May, the old New York Times Science writer Nicholas Wade, in an article Facebook blurted out, argued that a lab leak was more likely than animal-to-human transmission, and a group of 18 bioscientists have called for more investigation. thorough. The Biden administration, to his credit, quickly turned around and launched its own investigation, and apparently several officials now believe the lab leak theory is probably correct. “Disinformation”!

This example provides powerful support for Galileo’s view that the debate on scientific issues is best done in the open. But, of course, the urge to suppress speech is not limited to science. As conservative commentator Stephen L. Miller writesSuppressing information about vaccines will directly result in whatever they think is misinformation about gun violence, the climate, health care or what defines a man or a woman. This is why they are doing this.

If you think this is extravagant, consider that, as Town halls Guy Benson argues, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has extended its scope to the study of gun violence and climate change while leaving its primary mission to advance public health atrophy, as evidenced by its inability to produce a COVID test.

It’s easy to imagine this administration pressuring Facebook and other social media to remove information on other issues – for example, like the The New York Post Michael Goodwin notes that his journal’s scoops of Hunter Biden’s shady business dealings were largely blocked from public view in the weeks leading up to the 2020 election.

The suppression of speech is obviously an addiction. That is why, in the 1790s, they adopted a constitutional amendment guaranteeing “freedom of speech and of the press”. Or is it obsolete in these modern times?

This article was originally published here.

Source link

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.