Suspension of a politician or president’s account is clearly election interference. It is not acceptable in our society on a values level but it should also be illegal because it’s effectively a donation to the other side. The more fundamental problem is that large social media platforms and infrastructure providers like AWS are utilities and should be highly regulated so they behave like a public utility and also broke up for anti competitive reasons to the extent possible. But we seem to be allergic to regulations that make sense - and ironically, Republicans in particular are blindly anti regulation.
FTA: Under Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, social media platforms are allowed to moderate their services by removing posts that, for instance, are obscene or violate the services’ own standards, so long as they are acting in “good faith.”
Suspension of a politician or president’s account is clearly election interference. It is not acceptable in our society on a values level but it should also be illegal because it’s effectively a donation to the other side. The more fundamental problem is that large social media platforms and infrastructure providers like AWS are utilities and should be highly regulated so they behave like a public utility and also broke up for anti competitive reasons to the extent possible. But we seem to be allergic to regulations that make sense - and ironically, Republicans in particular are blindly anti regulation.
FTA: Under Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, social media platforms are allowed to moderate their services by removing posts that, for instance, are obscene or violate the services’ own standards, so long as they are acting in “good faith.”
The court document: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.38...