In today’s world, it’s all too clear that those on the left have a huge advantage in controlling discourse by virtue of having access to the biggest social media outlets. They don’t view this as an issue—until conservatives try to level the playing field and gain influence through the same networks. Then suddenly, leftist hosts like Joe Scarborough start changing their tune about the topic of free speech for a split second.
Comments from MSNBC host Joe Scarborough reflect a growing sentiment of mistrust toward big tech companies that have begun to accrue massive power in the public square. With tech giants increasingly deciding which content they deem appropriate or inappropriate, the concept of free speech is beginning to feel out of touch today. As journalist and non-journalists alike use technology platforms to advance a variety of ideas, many fear we’re heading towards a future where only certain types of speech will be allowed online. Joe Scarborough is out of the blue calling for accountability in this new world.
News buster reports, according to Morning Joe co-host Joe Scarborough and New York Times editorial board member Mara Gay, technological advancements have rendered the concept of free speech “outdated” because non-journalists are using it to spread “hate speech” and “dangerous” ideas.
The Supreme Court is debating whether companies like Google are liable for content posted on their sites. Leftist pundits have been cheering them on, until old time republican Joe Scarborough had a lucid moment.
https://www.mrctv.org/videos/morning-joe-declares-free-speech-be-out-date
And it almost seemed like Mara understood what Joe was talking about until she lost it again.
Before she stopped thinking, we almost had her there.
The case before the Court deals with radicalization, and the idea that Morning Joe would use that to go after their domestic opponents shows why people are right to be concerned about people like Gay appointing themselves as the deciders of what constitutes misinformation or hate speech.
Joe was correct in recognizing the need for regulation of big tech companies, but his justification seemed very convenient given that his party no longer controlled all those major platforms. When these powerful companies began to act more like publishers than simple social media, it became clear that Section 230 – which allows them to operate without much regulatory oversight – had to go. Rather than allowing all manner of speech protected under the first amendment, when many of these companies started censoring what they deemed offensive or inappropriate; which ultimately highlighted the necessity for much stricter regulations around how such huge organizations can use their influence and power to stifle your voice.
Let’s continue this conversation, in the comments below.
