How Would The GOP Feel If Democrats In Congress Demanded Details Regarding How Fox News Or The NY Post Made Editorial Decisions?

We’ve already talked a bit about how Rep. Jim Jordan’s “Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Government” is the exact thing it claims it seeks to stop: a part of the government that is being weaponized to attack free speech.

This week, Jordan sent a letter to Mark Zuckerberg, demanding he reveal a bunch of information regarding how Meta’s new Twitter-competitor is handling moderation:

The Committee on the Judiciary is conducting oversight of how and to what extent the Executive Branch has coerced and colluded with companies and other intermediaries to censor speech. In furtherance of this oversight, on February 15, 2023, the Committee issued a subpoena to you compelling the production of documents related to content moderation and Meta’s engagements with the Executive Branch. In light of Meta’s introduction of a new social media platform, “Threads,” we write to inform you that it is the Committee’s view that the subpoena of February 15 covers material to date relating to Threads.

Now, imagine if the Democrats were in control over the House, and they formed a committee that sent a similar subpoena to Fox News or to the NY Post “compelling” either of those orgs to detail how it made editorial choices, what stories it would cover, what opinion writers it would publish, or what stories would go on the front page with what headlines?

People would (rightly!) be up in arms over it, calling out a gross violation of the 1st Amendment, in which the government was demanding to interfere in 1st Amendment protected editorial choices.

That’s exactly what’s happening here. Content moderation decisions by companies are editorial choices, protected by the 1st Amendment, and Congress (or any government officials) has no business getting involved.

Hilariously, the letter points to the ruling in Louisiana that argued that the Biden administration unfairly sought to influence moderation decisions as a reason why Meta must reveal its editorial policies to the government.

Given that Meta has censored First Amendment-protected speech as a result of government agencies’ requests and demands in the past, the Committee is concerned about potential First Amendment violations that have occurred or will occur on the Threads platform. Indeed, Threads raises serious, specific concerns because it has been marketed as rival of Elon Musk’s Twitter, which has faced political persecution from the Biden Administration following Musk’s commitment to free speech. In contrast, there are reports that Threads will enforce “Instagram’s community guidelines,” which resulted in lawful speech being moderated following pressure by the government. Despite launching only 12 days ago, there are reports that Threads is already engaging in censorship, including censoring users but offering no grounds for appeal.

Now, remember, in that ruling, Judge Terry Doughty explicitly called out as pernicious “the power of the government to pressure social-media platforms to change their policies and to suppress free speech.” Now tell me how this letter is not abusing the power of government to pressure Meta to change its policies and suppress free speech?

For what it’s worth, almost everything Jordan writes in the paragraph above is bullshit. Threads’ decisions on moderation are not a 1st Amendment violation, because Meta is a private company and can moderate how it sees fit. Not having an appeal option may be stupid, but it’s none of the government’s business.

Also, I legitimately laughed outloud reading the line about Elon Musk’s “commitment to free speech.” Remember, he’s been suspending journalist accounts when they say stuff he doesn’t like. Most recently he took down Aaron Greenspan’s accounts, after Greenspan had become a thorn in his side. What “commitment to free speech”?

Anyway, the whole thing is exactly what Jordan pretends he wants to stop. So, again, anyone defending this absolute bullshit needs to answer how they would feel if a subcommittee headed by, say, Rep. Adam Schiff, were sending identical letters and subpoenas to Fox News, how would they react? It would be wrong for Schiff to do that, and it’s wrong now for Jordan to be doing this and anyone who actually believes in the 1st Amendment should be calling out this kind of bullshit.