"But It's a Private Company" Doesn't Excuse the Ongoing Censorship

"But It's a Private Company" Doesn't Excuse the Ongoing Censorship
(AP Photo/Marcio Jose Sanchez, File)

There’s a common response from the left about the big tech purge going on right now.

Conservatives are at the business end of a Silicon Valley hammer, with large swaths of people being purged for the crime of wrong-think. Naturally, this has caused the ones being censored to shout with what voices they still have about the unfair treatment they’re receiving by the billionaire activists currently running the tech show. This, in turn, is met with a typical snide remark from the left.

“They’re a private corporation, they can do what they want,” they say.

You can almost hear the mocking tone through the text of the post. That said, they’re not all the way wrong, but they’re not exactly right either.

Legally, banning someone for expressing conservative views or even views critical of the social media platform itself, then hiding behind the wording of Section 230 is wrong to do. If these sites are platforms, they have no business acting like publishers, and if they want to act like publishers then they should be ready to follow the rules put upon publishers.

There’s an even bigger point to make here. The fact that, while it’s okay for a private company to do as they please with their business, it doesn’t make it morally right and, on top of that, any company with this much power attempting to silence entire swaths of people can only have socio/political intentions and agendas.

They’re not just acting like a publisher, they’re acting like a political propaganda arm of a political party that also has the power to silence any opposing message. A corporation is acting on behalf of a political ideology that has power in the government right now and silencing dissent.

What does that sound like? There’s a word for that with a haunting definition.

“A tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control…violent suppression of the opposition.”

What I just defined was fascism. Only instead of jackboots and weird mustaches, we now have pink hair and liberal arts degrees. They don’t need to burst into your house in order to find the undesirables, they can now monitor your social media feeds and see everything from what you’re saying, to where you’re going and what activities you’re getting up to.

Say the wrong thing and you may find yourself suspended. You don’t even have to really say anything evil. Ron Paul was suspended from Facebook for pointing out that Trump didn’t actively encourage a riot to happen, and that big tech is effectively becoming a propaganda arm of the left-leaning party in our government as I described above.

(READ: The Reason for Ron Paul’s Suspension from Facebook Is Revealed, and It’s Frightening)

“It’s a private company” is no longer a legitimate comeback if the private company is in direct cahoots with a government party and/or pushing an agenda that a government party benefits from, whether that government is American or Chinese.

This is effectively getting around a legal issue while accomplishing a very heinous task of taking over both the government and the culture by controlling the means by which we get our information or who can introduce that information into what’s supposed to be the open public square.

Section 230 needs to be reformed if America is going to have any semblance of normalcy back. The power the social media companies have over the country right now is a full-on crisis. The information control we’re experiencing right now is swiftly becoming more and more draconian.

Our elected leaders need to put an emphasis on stopping the abuse of power happening every day by social media giants who control almost everything in our lives from the way we get news, communicate, or even purchase supplies. There cannot be a more important thing on the docket for the midterm elections than this.


Trending on RedState Video