FCC member: Recent Biden stories blocked on social media ‘watershed moment’ for big tech
Brendan Carr, a member of the Federal Communications Commission, says the recent news story about Joe Biden and son Hunter Biden being blocked on major social media platforms is a “watershed moment” for big tech companies.
“There’s a huge divide between the power, the influence, the bias that big tech has, and the complete absence of regulation,” Carr told “Just the News AM” host Carrie Sheffield.
Earlier [last] week, The New York Post published a story based on new emails appearing to reveal more about Hunter Biden’s business dealings in Ukraine and him apparently setting up a meeting between a top executive in that country and father Joe Biden, who was vice president at the time.
Critics of the decision said it was tantamount to political censorship.
Carr explained how tech companies are in favor of taking speech off the internet.
“That’s not what Congress intended with Section 230,” he said, referring to the part of law that protect Internet companies when posting third-party content. “So I think we can modernize, clarify the rules, so that more speech stays out there. At the end of day, we want people deciding for themselves, the value of speech, the value of information, not Silicon Valley.
The Trump administration filed a petition for rule-making at the FCC over the summer, which intends to seek clarity on Section 230.
Carr said the time to move forward and address these issues is now, and he believes that it will take many different regulatory agencies to address the issue.
“This is a watershed moment for all of us that have been working to rein in big tech, you know, we have never had an institution in history that has this much influence and control over speech,” he said.
In banning the posting of the Biden story, Twitter cited rules about allow information that might have been acquired through hacking. The platform has since revised the rules. Facebook also did not allow the story to be posted.
The FCC can’t remove the Section 230 statute, but it can clarify the decisions Congress has already made.
“Courts have given sweeping interpretations of Section 230 conferring immunities and privileges on big tech that Congress never provided them,” Carr said referring to what Justice Thomas said earlier [last] week. “Our job at the FCC will be to close some of those loopholes, while Congress and other entities look at potentially revoking 230 entirely.”
Here’s the full interview:
(TLB) published this article with permission of John Solomon at Just the News
Some emphasis and pictorial content added by (TLB)
Click Here to read about the staff at Just the News
Related from The Liberty Beacon:
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.