Lawmakers are moving towards a middle ground with conflicting political narratives about last year’s unrest. Democrats want online companies to do more to dispel election-related fraud, but Republicans have accused the forums of cracking down on right-wing censorship. .
“From 2021 onwards,” said Mary McKord, director general of the Georgetown University Constitution Institute. “One of the most shocking developments since the uprising has been the establishment of consensus among the elites and politicians,” he said. Advocacy and Protection.
He added: “They have made ideological violence the main thing. “Americans are deeply concerned that violence may be needed to save the country.”
Political hot potatoes
Policymakers and social media companies January 6 One of the main reasons they are still struggling to catch a lie is that the Capitol attack itself has become a controversial state.
In the days following the uprising, both Republicans and Democrats, like Trump’s Lindsay Graham (RS.C.), called for an end to the war. After January 6, Trump himself was ridiculed by many of his supporters and even his own nominees.
That first bilateral party provided political cover for social media giants to re-discredit election fraud and provide information to law enforcement agencies investigating the attack. Trump’s bans – even though Google YouTube and Facebook have the right to restore them before the 2024 presidential election – were also a watershed moment.
“Trump was out of platform when companies were crossing the line,” said Katy Harbaz, a former senior Facebook public policy executive who previously worked for the Senate Republican National Campaign. “After that, they felt more comfortable downloading content posted by politicians.”
That comfort did not last long.
Instead, GOP voters and politicians are spreading rumors of the 2020 election that helped spark the attack, and Congress – and many others in the country – have been divided over the issue on January 6. That left social media companies. Vulnerable to any action you take in connection with last year’s riots or party attacks.
For Democrats, the companies simply did not do enough.
“It is clear that some social media companies have opted for profit over human security,” said Frank Palone (DNJ), chairman of the House Energy and Trade Committee, who spoke on behalf of Facebook, Twitter and Google executives. About the role until January 6th. “These corporations have no intention of securing their platforms, but instead have taken steps to highlight content that could endanger our community and provoke violence.”
Republicans are stepping up their protests as freedom fighters question the outcome of the election. Lawmakers, including Congressman Marjorie Taylor Green (R-ga), have described the Democratic crackdown as a “political witch hunt for Republicans and Trump supporters.” (Green, who made the allegations in a Facebook video that reached 309,000 viewers since early December, has been permanently blocked by her personal Twitter account this week.)
They are also collecting people who have been expelled from social media.
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy has threatened to retaliate against online law enforcement agencies under Section 230 – a law that would allow companies to prosecute and define content for most consumer content.
McCarthy warned in one Series of tweets Following Tuesday’s ban, future Republican House of Representatives Twitter and other social media companies will work to ensure that “230 protections are lost” if they “avoid unconstitutional speeches.”
“Being a publisher and a censorship regime means shutting down the business model you trust today, and I will work to make that happen,” he added.
For Democrats, the fact that the forum did not stop all hate speech on January 6 underscores the importance of new laws. Frances Hawgen, a Facebook hacker who leaked documents showing that the technology giant had been battling to capture the protesters’ posts until January 6, hoped they would be revived last spring.
After being introduced by the Hawgen Senate, Democrat-led bill Section 230 seeks to recommend content offline that could cause serious emotional or physical harm if you use “knowingly or recklessly” algorithms to avoid online protection. The bill has no Republican support. Criticism of freedom of speech.
Two tech executives, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media, said lawmakers and staff from both sides had been accused of playing a role in the attack. Negotiations have often been privatized, with policymakers accusing the companies of playing fast and lax with American democracy.
With a small bilateral agreement, one of the technology executives added, social networks will be more careful about how they handle content that does not violate their January 6-related terms.
“Congress struggles to find a fair future,” Conn. From our point of view, we have different views on what the harm is. Because – as a society – we are committed to freedom of speech.
False information rabbit hole
Since the Capitol Hill riots, major social networking sites have removed countless accounts of white supremacists and extremists. January 6: Advise algorithms to hide conspiracy videos from entering people’s food. The companies have won investments in data verification partnerships and online information centers.
But it is still easy to find organized campaigns to discredit the election results of millions of followers on January 6 and, in the internet, to distrust the Biden 2020 victory. And to coordinate possible violent responses.
Politico In the four-week period ending January 4, 2022, he received posts related to the 2020 election and the January 6 misinformation. The findings were compiled by CrowdTangle on social media analytics. A Facebook-powered tool that reviews articles posted on the platform and on Twitter, as well as provides various analytics on YouTube and three fringe social networks, Getter, Telegram and Gab.
The content includes partial attacks on Jan. 6 by misleading news about elected officials and online influencers to a large online audience. Among the best online communities on alternative social networks, local extremists have shared images of violence and openly discussed attacks on election officials.