Recently, republican Texas governor, Greg Abbott announced his support for Senate Bill 12 which many of his fellow conservative leaders have already previously expressed support for. As the article puts it, this bill will “help prohibit social media companies from censoring Texans based on the viewpoints they express.” Essentially, this bill, if passed, will allow individual states to counteract censoring by big tech companies like Twitter or Facebook on their platforms. To Abbott and other bill supporters, the bill will essentially help stop, what they believe to be, unnecessary silencing of conservative viewpoints by the accumulation of power from large tech companies which Abbott has expressed as both “un-American” and “un-Texan.”
In fact, many other states have started to express similar interest in the bill and have actually begun the process of filing similar legislation. The main defense these conservative supporters of the bill have expressed is the 1st Amendment as they claim that the censorship from social media corporations infringed on their freedom of speech. Abbott and his allies do seem to recognize the limitations placed on the first amendment placed by precedent cases such as Schenck v. US and Brandenburg v. Ohio however, they argue that the silencing of such conservative figures on these platforms is unlawful as they were simply expressing political speech, religious speech or other harmless opinions but nothing remotely related to seditious speech and speech that would incite imminent unlawful action and a clear and present danger. However, the support for the bill has quickly garnered much controversy with many pointing out Donald Trump’s recent suspension from Twitter. In the suspension of his account, Twitter reasoned that Donald Trump’s censorship was completely reasonable as his statement on the platform right after the Jan 6. capitol attack “[inspired] others to replicate the violent acts.” Many have come to Twitter’s side by quoting Trump’s words where he called the rioters “Great American Patriots” as well as encouraging that “[they] will have a GIANT VOICE long into the future.” Critics explain how this type of speech, which encourages such dangerous and unlawful actions as the deadly attack on the capitol, is the type Abbot is trying to protect. Furthermore, opponents of Abbott also point out how his strong support and work on the bill is purely in an attempt to distract the country from the current situation in Texas. Thousands of Texans have died from freezing temperatures which the Texas Democratic Party Chair, Gilberto Hinojosa, has stated that it was due to the “catastrophic failure in leadership” from Abbott and his allies. Many have rushed by his side claiming that instead of paying homage or helping the Texans who have risked their lives, not only with COVID-19 but with the current freezing temperatures, Abbott and his staff have been wasting time with this new bill.
What do you think about this situation? Do you believe that this bill should be passed to help protect the expression of these views on social media or is it necessary that certain views, despite them being political or opinionated be censored? In addition, what do you believe about the criticism of Abbott’s leadership? Should he be criticized for his focus on this censorship bill rather than on his aid of Texans.
Sources:
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/texas-greg-abbott-social-media-conservative-bias-censorship-law/
1 comment:
The Bill of Rights (and thus the First Amendment) is amendments of civil liberties, those that protect citizens from the government, not Twitter. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act states that private internet companies cannot be held accountable for restricting material they judge to be unfit ("obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable”). I think SB12 is an attempt to make Texans feel like they are seen, like they have someone in government advocating for their Twitter use, but in reality, Sec 230 exists and gives companies the right to do as they feel fit. True representation for these people should come from representatives attempting to repeal the act. With this and the “complete opening up” of Texas, I could see why people think of his actions as a distraction. I think the repeal of the mask mandate is probably more of a distraction, as Abbott himself didn’t author SB12, but rather state Sen. Bryan Hughes.
Post a Comment