Vice President Jd Vance's Words in Europe On the United States' obligations for freedom of speech are on a collision course with some of what is happening in the States. The Federal Communications Commission and the Federal Trade Commission are directed in the opposite direction of vances careful remarks.
On February 11th Vance brave informed A summit for artificial intelligence in Paris that “American AI is not summarized in a tool for authoritarian censorship”. A few days later he told An audience in Munich, “in Great Britain and all over Europe, freedom of speech, I fear, is on the retreat.”
His scolding is deserved. Great Britain Recent fine A man who prays silently and has not hindered anyone near an abortion clinic. Last month, a CBS message “60 minutes” segment The language police emphasized Germany's language police by questioning prosecutors who triggered critical politicians on houses and electronics triggered by the online comments of the people. Fire, the basis for individual rights and expression, has collected other enormous totality Examples From the continent.
Fortunately, the 1st amendment protects the Americans from such violations of their freedom of speech. For this reason, the latest measures by the commercial commission and the Communication Commission are so strange.
The FTC started on February 20 A public investigation “In order to better understand how technology platforms deny or affect users' access to services, based on the content of their language or their belonging, and how this behavior may have violated the law.” But because these technical platforms, including Facebook, YouTube and X, are all private companies, the 1st change that the citizens protects against Government As observed in Europe, censorship is not involved. Exactly the opposite: The implicit approach of the FTC against language decisions of private technology companies is even the Freedom of speech.
As an example of a real example, as you should not expect that the first change is used for your speech While visiting Disneyland, don't expect it on a social media platform. Platforms can feel like the city square and are often referred to as the city square, but just like Main Street from Disneyland, USA, they are actually not a public place. Indeed, they are private property of companies with self -freedom and a legitimate interest in curating behavior to create a specific environment.
Tech platforms have the right to remove content that you do not want to wear, just as Disney can remove you from the parks if you wave a political banner or hold on to a soap box or “speak” in other ways that violate its rules. You may not like the result, but the legality of this trigger is not a serious question.
In contrast to state violations of constitutionally protected speech, the same situation of private activities is also ignored in the city in the FCC.
Before he was increased by President Trump to the chairman, the FCC commissioner Brendan Carr sent a letter In November to Alphabet, Apple, Meta and Microsoft accused them of participating in a “censor cartel” by contacting content consulting companies News guard.
The entry of the FCC in newsrooms also contradicts the 1st change. The agency is Investigation KCBS All News Radio in San Francisco for reporting on immigration and customs authorities, which are protected by the 1st change. It has too restarted A previously closed examination of processing an interview before the election with Kamala Harris by CBS News. This campaign followed Trump to demand CBS to “lose his license”. The agency also opened one Investigation in NBCUniversal and his parent company Comcast, private companies, about their practices.
Even before the presidential election 2024, Carr announced In cable news, the agency would examine whether a Cameo appearance by Harris in NBC's “Saturday Night Live” had violated the “same time ruler”, which indicates that the revocation of the license was an option. As it turned out, the Trump campaign was given by the network of the same time, but the most important question is why the anachronistic rule still exists.
This political moment offers the opportunity to get rid of outdated legacy regulations that can be used to prefer a party or unfavorable.
If the same time rule for broadcasting organizers ever made sense, this was based on the scarcity of the news agencies. However, today's information and entertainment landscape is full of cable news, social media, websites, satellite radio and many other media that are on the side of licensed transmitters. Why not guided the FCC, whether by Republicans or Democrats, from the business of the language police?
The United States should take their own advice and reduce the interference of the executive agencies online and through the air waves.
Jessica Melugin is the director of the Center for Technology and Innovation in the competitive Enterprise Institute.