I
was surprised to learn that Facebook recently flagged a news article I posted
on one of my Facebook pages as “false information.”
The
article I posted was about new Durham investigation allegations against the
Hillary Clinton campaign and its associates.
The
article clearly cited a federal court filing and a former Congressional
investigator with a deep understanding of Democrats’ work to concoct the bogus
Russia collusion narrative that divided our nation for years.
This
wouldn’t be an issue today if more journalists did their job of being the
police of our society and reported on all investigations not just ones that
appeal to a certain political party.
What
kind of message does this censorship send to a reporter who does take on the
new allegations against the Clinton campaign and its associates and its labeled
disinformation?
I
don’t think that will encourage more journalists to cover this issue.
It’s
truly mind-blowing that these companies continue to interfere in free
expression.
Big
tech is silencing everyone they disagree with and clearly they see no check to
their power.
The
article I cited to in my post was on FoxNews.com, a mainstream news
organization.
Why
does Facebook and one of its third party fact checker partners get to make the
decision that this news article is considered false information?
That
decision should be made by the American people who should be able to view that
content and decide for themselves.
It
shouldn’t be decided by our Big Tech overlords who seem to only find fault with
content that is conservative or goes against the liberal narrative.
These
are the same outlets that allowed information relating to the Steele Dossier to
run wild and free yet censored Hunter Biden news articles during the 2020
election.
Now
they’re doing the bidding for the Clinton camp.
Why
are they so afraid of reporting that exposes the Russia collusion hoax?
Silencing
or chilling free speech and the back and forth discussion of ideas is wrong.
Increasingly
we see the tag “misinformation” or “disinformation” given to content that the
liberal mainstream media simply disagrees with or goes against their chosen
narrative.
Finding
and seeking the truth should not be about silencing voices but allowing robust
discourse.
It’s
time that we examine the Section 230 immunity that has enabled these companies
to avoid any liability.
We
must stop these companies from arbitrarily deciding what speech is acceptable
for the country.
It
has become increasingly clear that these dominant platforms controlling
discussion and dialogue are more beholden to cancel culture and not to the
fundamental free speech principles that this country was founded upon.
These
Big Tech companies have few competitors and are immune from liability.
These
companies are unaccountable to their customers, the courts and the government.
If
not for their monopoly power and Section 230 immunity, these companies might
not be involved in the actions and censorship we see today.
As
a United States Senator and someone who has been vocally outspoken about my
concerns with censorship on online platforms, I’ll continue to do everything in
my power to prevent the censorship of speech and ideas on behalf of Iowans and
all Americans.
Simply
put we deserve better than woke monopolists and their liberal lapdogs deciding
what we can discuss.