Image source,EPA
Former U.S. President Trump announced that he will sue technology companies Google, Twitter and Facebook. He claimed to be a victim of “censorship.”
The CEOs of these three companies were also included in the list of defendants.
In January this year, after Trump supporters launched a congressional riot, several of his social media accounts were blocked. These platforms stated that this was due to public safety considerations. Before the riots, Trump repeatedly accused the US election results of being “distorted” and “falsified” without evidence, allowing Democrat Joe Biden to win.
On Wednesday (7th), Trump called the lawsuit “a beautiful development in freedom of speech.”
Trump held a press conference at his golf resort in New Jersey that day, condemning social media companies and Democrats for spreading rumors.
“We demand the end of the shadow ban, the cessation of silence, the cessation of blackouts, evictions and cancellations, which are well known,” Trump said. If these companies can “censor” the president, they can censor everyone. He has repeatedly expressed his dissatisfaction with being “silent” on social media.
The aforementioned technology companies have not yet responded to Trump’s lawsuit.
Twitter previously stated that Trump’s account was banned because several tweets on January 8 this year, two days after the congressional riots, involved “glamorizing violence.”
In those tweets, Trump called the “great patriots” he voted would make a “big voice”, and they would not “be disrespected or unfairly treated in any form.” Another tweet stated that he would not attend Biden’s presidential inauguration.
Freedom of speech vs social media censorship
The social media giant’s “blocking” of Trump has a significant effect. He has lost the Twitter and Facebook accounts of millions of fans. At present, he mainly uses mass emails to convey his views to supporters, which has greatly hit Trump. And even the grassroots mobilization ability of the Republican Party.
Image source,Getty Images
BBC North America technology reporter James Clayton (James Clayton) analyzed that this lawsuit shows that these social media are particularly important to Trump.
Trump previously expressed his intention to build a social media platform, but there has been no public progress.
Experts generally believe that the probability of success of this lawsuit is not high.
It is expected that Trump’s side will argue that social media companies have harmed his freedom of speech. According to the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, “Congress shall not enact laws on the following matters: establishing a religion or prohibiting freedom of religion, depriving freedom of speech or freedom of the press, or depriving the people of the right to peaceful assembly and petition to the government.”
The accused technology companies will counter that, as private companies, they have the right to decide which users can use the platform, which does not fall within the scope of the First Amendment from government review.
Section 230 discussion is getting fierce
The more critical issue in this discussion about social media censorship and freedom of speech is how the government should regulate technology giants.
The lawsuit initiated by Trump is also following the actions of Republicans in Congress. On the same day, the Republicans published a plan to “counter big technology companies” in Congress, calling for the use of antitrust laws to break up technology giants and amending a law called Section 230.
This seemingly humble provision has a huge impact on social media giants.
Article 230 stipulates that social media sites are not responsible for the content of users’ tweets. This means that these companies are more like “platforms” for publishing speech, rather than playing the role of “publishers.”
Trump has repeatedly threatened to repeal this law during his presidency, believing that it provides social media companies with an exemption umbrella from censorship.
On the Democratic Party, there are also critics who support the repeal of this law. During the campaign, Biden expressed support for the abolition, hoping to promote social media to strictly censor the content posted by users and reduce the spread of fake news.
“The Wall Street Journal” analyzed earlier that the two parties may reach a compromise solution to reduce the scope of exemption in Section 230.