Bro. No: Check Out Our FACT-NUKE of Every Claim Adam Schiff Made in...
The Harmeet Hammer Is DROPPING on Blue States That Continue to Defy Anti-Discrimination...
The Fonz's Attempt to Gaslight the Right Over Measles Outbreak Is SO Not...
LOCKED and LOADED: Fewer Than One in Ten Canadians Have Given Up Their...
Jessica Tarlov Insists Trump Supporters Didn't Vote for What ICE Is Doing Now...
Chelsea Clinton Patting Her Family's Foundation on the Back for 'Helping' in Texas...
Must Be a Day That Ends in Y: Jasmine Crockett's Claim About Biden...
NBC News' Sympathy Piece About What 'Immigrant Detainees' Are Denouncing Definitely Earned...
DataRepublican Dumps Uber-Wealthy Democrat Rep on Her NOGGIN for Attacking Bezos' Wealth i...
Tour Group Under NUCLEAR Levels of Fire for Sending Grossly Antisemitic Email Refusing...
Chuck Schumer Squirms and Pivots to Trump When Repeatedly Asked About Zohran Mamdani
We Interrupt Your Regularly Scheduled Program to Show X User Maze Nuking TF...
Oh NO He Di'int! Brit Hume Uses John Brennan and James Comey Investigation...
Greg Gutfeld Exposes a BIG Problem for the Dems Right Now (Broken 'Hoax...
Who Was Jeffrey Epstein and How Did He Become the Monster We Know...

@NewsBusters: 'We've Recorded Over 8,000 Cases of Online Censorship'

AP Photo/Michael Dwyer, File

NewsBusters of the Media Research Center tweets that it has recorded over 8,000 cases of online censorship.

Advertisement

It is a blessing to live in a nation where the freedom of speech exists.

Online censorship is a double-sided coin. On the one hand, online media platforms are private companies and, as such, hold rights to make business decisions. On the other hand, companies that purport themselves to be marketplaces of online communication and information dissemination should allow communication and information dissemination.

Widely used media platforms bear a particular responsibility to maintain credibility on this issue. Though they are their own companies and conduct their own business, part of that business is properly stewarding the power and influence they hold. Perhaps they are "too big" to censor. If a major media platform selectively censors certain content, that selective censorship has a disproportional impact on other media and communication in general. When content that should not be censored is censored, there is an uneven disruption in the flow of communication.

A debate can be had about how, in practice, needed censorship and free speech should be balanced.

Advertisement

Some censorship is needed. If any platform, large or small, operates under the guideline of not allowing certain vulgar or otherwise distasteful content, that can, within reason, be a basis for censorship enforcement. A problem arises when an objective censorship guideline is stretched to include content that is disliked by the company or censors that be. A political candidate or officeholder posting content as such is newsworthy and should not be censored. There are other exceptions, as well.

The target should be as much freedom as possible, an appropriate rule of thumb for regulation in general. Censor as little as possible rather than pull down an inordinate amount of speech on flimsy grounds.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement