@MHS_Jenkins I'm trying to understand. Does free speech also mean freedom to spread harm? I likened some of the speech on social media to yelling fire in a crowded theater or promoting snake oil elixirs in the 1800s. From what I read, and correct me if I am wrong, the government requested that private social media companies take steps to prevent the dissemination of purported misinformation.

@TheresaVermont that's the excuse--stopping the spread of disinformation/misinformation. The concern is twofold: government colluding with media to control the information flow and then the government legislating via regulation rather than going through Congress.

Put it this way: Would you be OK with a Trump/GOP supermajority having these powers?

@MHS_Jenkins I don't want to lose sight of truth and public safety in this. No, I would not be comfortable with a Trump presidency with these powers because there are no guide rails for truth and safety in that world. But as a consumer, I sure would want the government to step in if I was being told that a snake oil elixir would cure cancer. The government has had a say in that for a very long time, with good reason.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

CounterSocial is the first Social Network Platform to take a zero-tolerance stance to hostile nations, bot accounts and trolls who are weaponizing OUR social media platforms and freedoms to engage in influence operations against us. And we're here to counter it.