言论自由

The limits on free speech in the internet era

Social media groups had no choice but to suspend, for now, Donald Trump

How quickly, in a crisis, the unthinkable can become reality. If it might have seemed fanciful a week ago that a US president could incite insurrection or face a second impeachment in a single term, so, too, would the prospect of social media platforms barring the “leader of the free world”. The bans by Twitter, Facebook and Instagram on President Donald Trump raise profound issues — of freedom of speech, and the precedents they may set for less free societies. While the “permanent” nature of Twitter’s suspension is questionable, however, not acting would have created even bigger risks.

In the exceptional circumstances of America today, platform companies were right to suspend Mr Trump’s access at least until the end of his presidential term. The president has glorified violence and egged on a challenge to US institutions that left five dead. Critics are right to say the move came cynically late. The president has repeatedly flouted the platforms’ user rules. Had the platforms acted earlier to remove offending presidential posts selectively, the need for tougher actions might have been averted.

Police had good reason for concern, moreover, that the president’s supporters were using both mainstream and more niche platforms to plot further violence. That justifies moves by Apple, Google and Amazon to restrict access to Parler, the “alt-tech” Twitter alternative beloved of the radical right.

您已阅读39%(1409字),剩余61%(2166字)包含更多重要信息,订阅以继续探索完整内容,并享受更多专属服务。
版权声明:本文版权归manbetx20客户端下载 所有,未经允许任何单位或个人不得转载,复制或以任何其他方式使用本文全部或部分,侵权必究。
设置字号×
最小
较小
默认
较大
最大
分享×